PDA

View Full Version : A Peek into the Regulatory Record of 978.20(a)


Stan_Humphries
05-10-2006, 8:59 PM
1164

Now, the Department can change its mind.

But when confronted with a petition for a writ of mandamus that would order the Department to open a registration for the “regulator-ily manufactured” Assault Weapons…

it would need to explain (in court) how its incorporation of definitions (and therefore a group of rifles) now meets the intent of the legislature when in the year 2000 (you'll have to go through the first few pages of the document) they admitted that such regulatory inclusions would expressly contravene the intent of the legislature.

Check it out:
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/attachmentb.pdf

xenophobe
05-10-2006, 9:18 PM
Very very interesting. Thank you for posting this.

shopkeep
05-10-2006, 9:24 PM
B1.31 looks like it's going to be hard to fight. I remember how hard they had to fight back in 1999 to arrive at the current definition.

Think the NRA will jump in for the fun again?

hoffmang
05-10-2006, 11:32 PM
I do think we can actually count on the NRA getting involved in the actual administrative hearings.

FreedomIsNotFree
05-11-2006, 3:30 AM
Ahhh Cool....There is actually an Attachment A, B and C.....

All you have to do is change the letter near the end of the link...

Attachment A - 45 Day Comment Period.
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/attachmenta.pdf


Attachment B - First 15 Day Comment Period.
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/attachmentb.pdf


Attachment C - Second 15 Day Comment Period
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/attachmentc.pdf


Anyone know how old this is?.......

adamsreeftank
05-11-2006, 3:53 AM
It's funny how the responses to the comment period seem to contradict the new memo over and over...

Q:Contributor doesn't understand how "a bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool", applies to "detachable magazine".

A:Certain firearms have fixed magazines that can be removed utilizing a bullet or cartridge. Identifying a bullet as a tool allows these types of magazine to appropriately remain fixed by definition.

Hmmmm

glen avon
05-11-2006, 7:55 AM
do you people even understand what the above stuff is?

it doesn't matter if it contradicts anything, old or new, they are comments. anybody can submit a comment. the responses are only that. the responses apply to a six-year old fact and law pattern. things change. those comments and responses were not drafted in contemplation of the off-list lower situation. of course they will not align perfectly.

thmpr
05-11-2006, 8:13 AM
do you people even understand what the above stuff is?

it doesn't matter if it contradicts anything, old or new, they are comments. anybody can submit a comment. the responses are only that. the responses apply to a six-year old fact and law pattern. things change. those comments and responses were not drafted in contemplation of the off-list lower situation. of course they will not align perfectly.


Just like the memo. It is just their opinion.

Ten Rounder
05-11-2006, 8:35 AM
It's funny how the responses to the comment period seem to contradict the new memo over and over...

Q:Contributor doesn't understand how "a bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool", applies to "detachable magazine".

A:Certain firearms have fixed magazines that can be removed utilizing a bullet or cartridge. Identifying a bullet as a tool allows these types of magazine to appropriately remain fixed by definition.

Hmmmm

A friend was telling me that at three gun matches a spent casing or a bullit is used to drop the mag, and he said they have been doing this for years. Are we really out of the loop?

bwiese
05-11-2006, 9:18 AM
A friend was telling me that at three gun matches a spent casing or a bullit is used to drop the mag, and he said they have been doing this for years. Are we really out of the loop?

Well, what kind of gun is it? That's the key.

Wow - If they're dropping the mag on a pistol-gripped/telestocked AR-pattern gun, they are feloniously constructing an AW every time they drop the mag.

Buncha idiots.

FreedomIsNotFree
05-11-2006, 11:33 AM
do you people even understand what the above stuff is?

it doesn't matter if it contradicts anything, old or new, they are comments. anybody can submit a comment. the responses are only that. the responses apply to a six-year old fact and law pattern. things change. those comments and responses were not drafted in contemplation of the off-list lower situation. of course they will not align perfectly.

What I find interesting is you can see the question count. As in, how many times that specific question was asked before being addressed by the DOJ.

shopkeep
05-11-2006, 12:14 PM
I have a feeling that after enough calls, letters, and perhaps a comment period that this memo will also be shot down. There's no way they can move forward with "capacity to accept" being anything non-permenant without fully banning fixed magazine centerfire semi-auto rifles. No fixed mag is permenantly attached, they are all readily removable as a safety feature. Obviously the lawyers comming up with these memos don't understand how firearms operate.

glen avon
05-11-2006, 1:51 PM
...Obviously the lawyers comming up with these memos don't understand how firearms operate.

which is the entire reason for notice and comment.

TKo_Productions
05-11-2006, 2:14 PM
which is the entire reason for notice and comment.

so are you going to show up and argue in our favor? or will you side with the CaDOJ? :D

icormba
05-11-2006, 2:15 PM
Well, what kind of gun is it? That's the key.

Wow - If they're dropping the mag on a pistol-gripped/telestocked AR-pattern gun, they are feloniously constructing an AW every time they drop the mag.

Buncha idiots.

While I do tend to agree... I've been thinking (yeah, a stretch for me! ;) )...

For instance... If a AR15 didn't have the spring in the mag release... Could it still be fired in semi-auto? How would you keep the mag from falling out?

I 1st started thinking about this when I was assembling my fixed mag FAL... I actually had a hard time getting the set screw to set with the magazine's follower/mag spring pushing it out of the mag well. I then tried to picture myself firing the rifle without the set screw with mag release spring missing all the while the mag falling out of the rifle. Wouldn't that, therefore, mean that the rifle is not capable of "Accepting" a removable mag if the mag keeps falling out? You would need that "tool" to put the mag back in, right?

Then again... I wouldn't do or try this myself. I was just imagining aloud and have no idea if it would work or not because it would be against the law to try, I guess? :confused:

grammaton76
05-11-2006, 2:17 PM
This was covered before - the DOJ could quite easily say that if you can hold it in there with your hand and fire a single round in semi-auto, then it's just as if you had a normally built up drop-mag rifle.

glen avon
05-11-2006, 2:18 PM
or will you side with the CaDOJ? :D

ya know the funny thing is I'm just trying to help here, but some folks really do think I am anti-calguns-off-list-lower. people have repeatedly called for by expulsion from this board. :eek:

ETA: of course I'll be there. sitting right next to Bill. which leaves the question....

.
.
.
.
.
.

which Bill?

MUA HA HA HAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PIRATE14
05-11-2006, 2:23 PM
ya know the funny thing is I'm just trying to help here, but some folks really do think I am anti-calguns-off-list-lower. people have repeatedly called for by expulsion from this board. :eek:

ETA: of course I'll be there. sitting right next to Bill. which leaves the question....

.
.
.
.
.
.

which Bill?

MUA HA HA HAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GLEN is okay......that PRYDE dude is suspect

dbol
05-11-2006, 2:45 PM
Well, what kind of gun is it? That's the key.

Wow - If they're dropping the mag on a pistol-gripped/telestocked AR-pattern gun, they are feloniously constructing an AW every time they drop the mag.

Buncha idiots.

So long as the mag removal requires a tool, I disagree.

It continues to perplex me why you take such a conservative view on this issue when your other positions regarding the whole off-list phenomenon are generally aggressive. The current regulatory definition of detachable magazine is one that can be removed readily without the use of a tool. If a magazine could be freely attached, but removed only with the use of a tool (e.g., a set-up where access to the magazine release button was inaccessible to objects with a diameter greater than 1/8"), how would that be considered a "detachable magazine" under the definition supplied in the regulations?


a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

xenophobe
05-11-2006, 3:11 PM
GLEN is okay......that PRYDE dude is suspect

You got that right.

+1

artherd
05-11-2006, 9:30 PM
those comments and responses were not drafted in contemplation of the off-list lower situation.
Um, weren't they actually?

Well, what kind of gun is it? That's the key.

Wow - If they're dropping the mag on a pistol-gripped/telestocked AR-pattern gun, they are feloniously constructing an AW every time they drop the mag.

Buncha idiots.
I still don't agree Bill. Yes the weapon has a "Capacity to Accept" something, but not a "Detachable Magazine".

The gun would have the "Capacity to Accept a Fixed Magazine."

which Bill?
You sir are an Evil Evil man! :D

This was covered before - the DOJ could quite easily say that if you can hold it in there with your hand and fire a single round in semi-auto, then it's just as if you had a normally built up drop-mag rifle.
You can't fire a 'single' round in semi-auto :D

But if you can fire 2 you may be in trouble. Something that had to be held together in order to be fired? A good defense attorney should be able to sway a jury to see that for the load of horse**** it is. Still, I wouldn't try it.

Stan_Humphries
05-13-2006, 9:35 AM
Let's just hope that many people file petitions for writs in several of the of California Court of Appeals regions: San Diego, Fresno, Riverside, and Santa Ana.

Unfortunately such petitions have a high rate of decline; quite often judges don't even ask for the respondents input. Denials are often issued on post-card style notices and shipped to you without any reasoning behind why your petition was denied.

I believe the next step would be for individuals to file a class action suit against the CA Department of Justice - asking for an immediate injunction of regulatory implementation until the issue can be settled and on grounds that A) DOJ's actions by re-defining such-and-such do not align with the legislative intent of the statute that grants them such power and B) if it is found that their actions are in sync with the legislative intent, the DOJ is required to open a registration window; for they will have added so many rifles into the AW category and it has always been the intent of the legislature to allow previously legally possessed and re-classified weapons be registered (even though the section of the statute that addresses opening the registration period refers explicitly to the AG adding the name and make of the weapon to the list, and does not specifically address the concept of identification via feature).