PDA

View Full Version : Permanent firearm alteration requirement, how to?


sac7000
05-14-2006, 2:41 PM
Has anybody received information from DOJ on how to "permanently alter a firearm to not accept a magazine" as per their latest memo yet? What is acceptable? What is not? Alison? Are you listening? Bill? Arnold?

AS45-70
05-14-2006, 3:47 PM
They have yet to specify any method.

blacklisted
05-14-2006, 4:03 PM
Someone here did a good job of welding a nut to the mag catch, but don't take the chance of butchering these precious receivers.

Why not just go with a detachable mag and no pistol grip?

blkA4alb
05-14-2006, 4:42 PM
Listen people you do NOT need to "permantly" alter anything. Why is everyone freaking out more over this memo than the last one. It still holds NO legal weight. I was out shooting my off-lister today, and guess what? I enjoyed it. Stop worrying about the all mighty memo and go use these lowers. I wont be changing anything until something with value is said.

sac7000
05-14-2006, 5:17 PM
I know it's just a meaningless memo but they (DOJ) said I could keep and shoot my OLL in Kalifornistan if I would just make it permanently incapable of accepting magazines.

I've got no problem with that, I just want to know *exactly* what needs to be done so that my Stag OLL and my 10 round bushmaster magazine are fused together in a fashion that receives the blessings of the Department of Justice. I'm fully willing to comply if only the DOJ would show me the way... hmmm....I hear a song coming on...show me the way....

So pleaseeeeee... Is it JBWeld and pop rivets? Epoxy and pop rivets? Pop rivets and more pop rivets? Secret DOJ superglue? Do I need to weld a aluminum cap over the bottom of the magazine? (god forbid)

Somebody out there from the DOJ is reading this post, somebody who can answer my question. Send it to my anonymous email address: bill95841@yahoo.com if you prefer, I'll keep your information confidential.

PanzerAce
05-14-2006, 5:29 PM
why are people so intent on f***ing up their lowers? if you really are that worried, just strip down the receiver, put it in a safe, and go buy a mini-14 or something untill this whole OLL situation is resolved.

12voltguy
05-14-2006, 5:38 PM
I'm buying lowers from all who are freaked out $10 shipped:D

AS45-70
05-14-2006, 6:12 PM
So pleaseeeeee... Is it JBWeld and pop rivets? Epoxy and pop rivets? Pop rivets and more pop rivets? Secret DOJ superglue? Do I need to weld a aluminum cap over the bottom of the magazine? (god forbid)

Somebody out there from the DOJ is reading this post, somebody who can answer my question. Send it to my anonymous email address: bill95841@yahoo.com if you prefer, I'll keep your information confidential.

It is your lower and i guess you can do whatever you want. I just dont see the point of potentially damaging your lower when the DOJ hasnt even released an approved method for the OLL's. If the pinned mags fly why weld them, if someone releases a new mag loc kit that bolts on and is DOJ approved...why weld it. I think your jumping the gun a bit.

If your so concerned about being overly CA legal purhaps should not have bought the lower.

Satex
05-14-2006, 6:19 PM
No one knows. There isn't any legal definition to the "permanent" statement. I think 10% already told us that sporting conversions called DOJ and asked if it would be ok to loctite or epoxy the nut, and in both case the DOJ said no.
This issue will be the big problem going forward.



I've got no problem with that, I just want to know *exactly* what needs to be done so that my Stag OLL and my 10 round bushmaster magazine are fused together in a fashion that receives the blessings of the Department of Justice. I'm fully willing to comply if only the DOJ would show me the way... hmmm....I hear a song coming on...show me the way....

So pleaseeeeee... Is it JBWeld and pop rivets? Epoxy and pop rivets? Pop rivets and more pop rivets? Secret DOJ superglue? Do I need to weld a aluminum cap over the bottom of the magazine? (god forbid)

tenpercentfirearms
05-14-2006, 6:23 PM
Ok look, THE DOJ MEMO MEANS NOTHING! This memo is no different than the catagory 4 memo of February 1st. You knew they were full of crap then, well they still are. We know what 978.20(a) says. A detachable magazine does not require the use of a tool to remove. PERIOD. If you have your own fixed mag special that requires the use of a tool to remove, great. If you have one of the three manufactured kits, great. Nothing has changed.

Quit giving credibility to undated, unsigned DOJ memos that directly contradict established code and laws. The DOJ said it best themselves early on in the game. No one has to listen to them. Any of the 58 DAs can prosecute you anyway.Who has been prosecuted so far? NO ONE. Go shoot your guns in any legal fashion you want. You are not criminals.

hawk1
05-14-2006, 6:28 PM
Darin has sent in his Prince50 Designs mag lock for approval.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=31115

kantstudien
05-14-2006, 6:34 PM
You want permanent? Give me your OLL and buy a FAB-10, that is pretty permanent.

shopkeep
05-14-2006, 8:37 PM
The problem with the DOJ is that they failed to take a proactive approach and are now forced into taking a reactive approach. They are likely aware that this memo is probably no more likely to stick around then the last one. Here's what we've learned so far:

1) it is possible for things such as fixed mag kits and sawed off pistol grips to BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CA LAW but the DOJ will still insist they are unacceptable.
2) Despite any insistance that fixed mags and other items they deem "unacceptable" are not legal, the DOJ has also shown they are bound by CA law as well.
3) The DOJ has consistantly been forced into a reactive position on the OLL situation. We have had an continue to enjoy the initiative.
4) Fixed magazine kits ARE legal.
5) There IS NO Category 4 or multiple "tiers" of "Assault Weapons". Once registered, you can do anything you want with an assault weapon.
6) A couple of guys who had never met in person before were able to outsmart a government agency full of attorneys and other professionals and in the process make them see what the law was and follow it!

jerryg1776
05-14-2006, 8:46 PM
Hey.. was wondering if any of the approved companies have made a campaign contribution to Lockyer. I can't remember if sources have to be disclosed (I think so). Now would it not be funny if the Fab10, Vulcan and the CaliLegal Bushmaster people made contributions and their methodology for modification is approved while all the others are not. Would that even be worth taking a look at?

Just throwing it against the fan and seeing if anything sticks.

adamsreeftank
05-14-2006, 9:01 PM
I agree that the memo was probably intended as a scare tactic and won't hold up to scrutiny, but for those considering altering their receivers to comply, please look at the thread I started about welding without actually altering the receiver or magazine.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=33661

Go ahead and flame me if you want. I can live with that.

artherd
05-15-2006, 7:55 AM
Man you guys were so concerned with the 'finish' of your LV lowers, now you're ready to spatter welds all over 'em? :)

It's just a memo, one that carrys no legal weight at all. It's also flat out incorrect legally speaking. It exists to foster but one purpose: impacting or stoping the sale of more OLLs.

For now I am ignoreing it.

AS45-70
05-15-2006, 10:26 AM
I agree that the memo was probably intended as a scare tactic and won't hold up to scrutiny, but for those considering altering their receivers to comply, please look at the thread I started about welding without actually altering the receiver or magazine.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=33661

Go ahead and flame me if you want. I can live with that.

The link in your post above doesnt look bad. I think if anyone is concerned about the mag kits not complying ( even though they do), this is the best you can do without damaging your lower. Providing you protect your lowers finish during the welding.

http://img361.imageshack.us/my.php?image=weldmagcatch1to.jpg

adamsreeftank
05-15-2006, 11:55 AM
For now I am ignoreing it.

That's why you are my hero.:D

blkA4alb
05-15-2006, 2:00 PM
That's why you are my hero.:D
Hes not the only one, I still shoot mine 3 times a week in the bay area. The almighty memo can kiss my ***.

sac7000
05-15-2006, 2:18 PM
For now I am ignoreing it.

Better yet, I'm printing it out to be glued to the back of a voodoo doll which I will toss into the hot coals of my BBQ after I finish cooking my sacrificial chicken that gave it's life to fill my stomach and stop the evil spirits from filling my mind with fear of jack-booted thugs kicking down my door and taking my gleaming fire sticks.

James R.
05-15-2006, 4:18 PM
"Once you have read this MEMO and realize that DOJ is NOT going to "roll over" on this issue, you'll understand that the ACTUAL new classification of these receivers is:

"Category 4 - ALUMINUM PAPERWEIGHT"

*rolls eyes* Yeah they don't have a business interest in all of this...California Legal Bushmaster that is.

Regards,

James R.