PDA

View Full Version : DOJ mailed me a letter


theseacow
07-01-2006, 3:21 PM
Sorry if this is already being discussed somewhere else, I couldn't find anything. I did see the new memo on DOJ's website, and I received a letter in the mail today from the DOJ about the upcoming change in legislation.

Did anybody else get this 3 page letter? This whole concept is crap about it not having any cost impact on individuals. It would cost me to convert it from its current legal status to something new.

I would go to Sacramento on the 16th, but I will be in Oregon that day, so I can't. This letter has offically pissed me off.

TonyNorCal
07-01-2006, 3:29 PM
Does the letter contain the same basic info as the DOJ memo or might it have any additional detail/info?

theseacow
07-01-2006, 3:32 PM
nothing really new. It is almost exactly like the memo.

daskraut
07-01-2006, 3:57 PM
Help me understand my little letter please ,the letter stated that a new assault weapon definition (sixth tern) "capacity to accept a detachable magazine", as meaning "capable of accommodating a detachable magazine, but shall not be construed to include a firearm that has been permanantly altered so it cannot accommodate a detachable magazine". What weapons does this effect??, is it only for off list or all semi auto centerfires??.

69Mach1
07-01-2006, 5:52 PM
Just got home to find my letter also.

uglygun
07-01-2006, 5:58 PM
Got one as well.

Only question I have is, did I receive this letter because I have registered AR15s from pre2000 or is it because my name is on a list somewhere after the asshats went through dealer records when I bought 2 OLLs.

CamW
07-01-2006, 7:09 PM
I got the same letter. The mailing list must be from the pre 2000 registration because I haven't bought any OLL's.

Mssr. Eleganté
07-01-2006, 7:16 PM
The wife of a friend just got the letter too.

She has not bought any OLL's.
She has no pre-2000 registered A/W's
She DID just register a .50 BMG rifle as an A/W

So it sounds like CalDOJ is only mailing these out to folks with registered A/W's, no matter which registration period they are under.

catsupsam
07-01-2006, 8:06 PM
I'm sure this letter is sent to people who registered or co-registered 0.50mbg rifles earlier this year.

My son got one and his only contact with the DOJ-Firearms is his co-registration with me on my AR-50.

leelaw
07-01-2006, 8:17 PM
No letter here - I have no pre-2K goodies, but do have a .50BMG, but it was registered before I moved.

I did buy OLLs.

Where did you guys who got the letters get your OLLs from?

blacklisted
07-01-2006, 8:21 PM
Hmm...I wonder how this affects .50s? Don't they have to be in a non-AW configuration? The Barrett M82 has a "hinged" magazine and a pistol grip, right? I wouldn't call that permanent...

bwiese
07-01-2006, 8:35 PM
Hmm...I wonder how this affects .50s? Don't they have to be in a non-AW configuration? The Barrett M82 has a "hinged" magazine and a pistol grip, right? I wouldn't call that permanent...


Correctamundo, senor. And when it was approved it was pre-AB50, when it was 'just another rifle'.

Rascal
07-01-2006, 8:38 PM
I got my letter today too.
I do have a registered .50 BMG.
I also have a OLL. One of the Group buys.

sac7000
07-01-2006, 8:49 PM
I got the same letter. The mailing list must be from the pre 2000 registration because I haven't bought any OLL's.

Must be, my buddy who has not purchased any OLL's but does have several pre 2000 AR's received the letter too.

vonsmith
07-01-2006, 9:33 PM
We better make our voices heard loud and rationally before the August 16th date. We don't want the DOJ saying, "Hey we contacted thousands of gunowners and they didn't have any comments. So the new proposed legislation must be okay."

I expect we'll get things started on this forum soon. We have lots of good people.


=vonsmith=

Forever-A-Soldier
07-02-2006, 11:02 AM
"So Duffy... do you have any theories to go with that tie?" :D *

O.k. seriously though, why did DOJ send this out to people who apparently registered AWs prior to the 2000 cut off? (btw, I haven't gotten one yet even though I have some registered AWs.) What purpose would it serve as I don't see any correlation between the CCR change and previously registered AWs.

Anyone have any ideas or am I missing something?

F.A.S. Out

(* from Boondock Saints)

chris
07-02-2006, 11:10 AM
can anyone post a copy of this letter. i'm in the desert and curious as to what is says. i wonder if i got one yet or my friends.

bonjing
07-02-2006, 1:23 PM
dwtt has it posted on another thread

http://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=36474&page=10

theseacow
07-02-2006, 1:27 PM
BTW, I have zero registered AR's, and 2 registered .50's.

NRAhighpowershooter
07-02-2006, 3:19 PM
A bunch of my HP shooters got letters the past few days.. non have OLL's but they have registered AW's.. so it looks like DOJ got everyones names from the AW lists...

CaptMike
07-02-2006, 7:14 PM
"So Duffy... do you have any theories to go with that tie?" :D *

O.k. seriously though, why did DOJ send this out to people who apparently registered AWs prior to the 2000 cut off? (btw, I haven't gotten one yet even though I have some registered AWs.) What purpose would it serve as I don't see any correlation between the CCR change and previously registered AWs.

Anyone have any ideas or am I missing something?

F.A.S. Out

(* from Boondock Saints)


often, as part of the process of making changes in regulations, there is usually an expectation that the public will be properly notified about the change. It is up to the each individual to know the law, but the public must be given the opportunity to be notified. This does not mean that all persons must be notified, but there is a good probability that the right people (those that will be affected) will be notified about the regulation change. This is not always required but is a good practice by the govt. to cover their butts and prevent any possible appeals in future cases. I am not an attorney but do work for the govt. and that is the reasoning I have been given in the past. hope this helps

capitol
07-02-2006, 7:58 PM
The DOJ sent letters to people who reg'd 50 BMG's only. This is where the adddesses came from and not reg'd AR's or OLL's.

NRAhighpowershooter
07-02-2006, 8:10 PM
The DOJ sent letters to people who reg'd 50 BMG's only. This is where the adddesses came from and not reg'd AR's or OLL's.



uuhhh.... I don't think so.... out of ALL of my HP shooters that received letters.. NONE own 50BMG's......

Hunter
07-02-2006, 8:35 PM
Hmm...I wonder how this affects .50s? Don't they have to be in a non-AW configuration? The Barrett M82 has a "hinged" magazine and a pistol grip, right? I wouldn't call that permanent...

Yep, the hinge point is actually two machine screws, one on each side.

capitol
07-02-2006, 8:37 PM
The only contact Ive had with the DOJ is one reg'd 50 BMG. Read back through the prior posts. It makes sense

grammaton76
07-02-2006, 10:36 PM
Talked to a friend of mine today who had a couple reg'ed AW's - he received no letter from the DOJ.

elsolo
07-02-2006, 10:44 PM
I got my letter Saturday. I have reg'd AW/.50BMG

"Where's my letter?"
Be patient, those of us that got them are only one mail delivery day ahead of where you will be Monday afternoon. It's not like the USPS is so efficient that everybody in the state of CA gets their mail on the exact same day, reguardless of where in the state they live relative to the post office that sent the outgoing mail. Who's to say the DOJ sent everybody letters in one batch, maybe the first 1/3 of the alphabet went out in batch-1, etc.

chris
07-03-2006, 12:13 AM
can't read it the page is blocked for me here. they block alot of stuff where i'm at. could someone post it here directly so i can read it.

69Mach1
07-03-2006, 12:18 AM
Title 11. Department of Justice Notice of Proposed Rulemaking


June 27, 2006

The Department of Justice ("Department" or "DOJ") proposes to amend Section 978.20 of Division 1, Title 11 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) regarding definitions of terms used to identify assault weapons after considering all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action.

INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Penal Code (PC) section 12276.1 identifies restricted assault weapons based on specific characteristics or features. Currently, California Code of Regulations (CCR) section 978.20 of Title 11 defines five terms used in § 12276.1 PC. The proposed amendment will define a sixth term, "capacity to accept a detachable magazine", as meaning "capable of accommodating a detachable magazine, but shall not be construed to include a firearm that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate a detachable magazine."

AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE

Authority: Penal Code section 12276.5(i)
Reference: Penal Code sections 12276.1, 12276.5, 12280, 12285, and 12289

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD

Any interested person, or his or her authorized representative, may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to the Department. The written comment period closes at 5:00 p.m. on August 16, 2006. Only comments received at the Department offices by that time will be considered.

Please submit written comments to:

Mail: Jeff Amador, Field Representative
Department of Justice
Firearms Licensing and Permits Section
P.O. Box 820200
Sacramento, CA 94203-0200
or
Email: jeff.amador@doj.ca.gov

PUBLIC HEARING

The Department will hold a public hearing beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 for the purpose of receiving public comments regarding the proposed regulatory action. The hearing will be held in the Department of Water Resources auditorium located at 1416 9th Street, Sacramento, California. The auditorium is wheelchair accessible. At the hearing, any person may present oral or written comments regarding the proposed regulatory action. The Department requests, but does not require, that persons who make oral comments also submit written copy of their testimony at the hearing.

DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION

The Department has made the following determinations:

Mandate on local agencies or school districts: None

Cost or savings to any state agency: None.

Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None.

Other nondiscretionary cost or savings imposed on local agencies: None.

Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None.

Significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states: None.

Cost impacts that a representative person or business would incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action: The agency is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action.

Significant effect on housing costs: None.

Small business determination: The Department has determined the proposed amendment does not affect small business. This determination is based on the fact that the proposed amendment simply defines a term used to identify assault weapons but does not place any additional cost burden on small businesses nor their customers.

Assessment regarding effect on jobs/businesses: The proposed amendment will not (1) create or eliminate jobs within California; (2) create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within California; or (3) affect the expansion of businesses doing business within California.

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES

In accordance with Government Code section 11346.5(a)(13), the Department must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Department, or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Department, would be either more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed regulations. The Department invites any person interested in presenting statements or arguments with respect to alternatives to the proposed regulations to do so at the scheduled hearing or during the written comment period.

CONTACT PERSONS

Please direct inquiries concerning the proposed administrative action to Jeff Amador at (916) 227-3661. The backup contact person is Troy Perry at (916) 227-3707. The mailing address for Jeff Amador and Troy Perry is:

Department of Justice
Firearms Licensing and Permits Section
P.O. Box 820200
Sacramento, CA 94203-0200


AVAILABILITY OF RULEMAKING FILE INCLUDING THE INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS

The DOJ will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying throughout the rulemaking process. The initial statement of reasons and the text of proposed regulations are currently available at the DOJ website at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/. You may also obtain copies by contacting Troy Perry at the telephone number or address listed above.

AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT

After considering all timely and relevant comments received, the Department may adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this notice. If the Department makes modifications which are sufficiently related to the originally proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the Department adopts the regulations as revised. The Department will accept written comments on the modified text for 15 days after the date on which they are made available. Copies of any modified text will be available from the DOJ website at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/. You may also obtain a written copy of any modified text by contacting Troy Perry at the telephone number or address above.

AVAILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

Upon completion, the final statement of reasons will be available at the DOJ website at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/. You may also obtain a written copy of the final statement of reasons by contacting Troy Perry at the telephone number or address above.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET

Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulations in strikeout format, as well as the Final Statement of Reasons once it is completed, can be accessed through the DOJ website at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/.

chris
07-03-2006, 12:26 AM
thank you for posting.

looks like they are trying to define what "is" is again. good luck to those going to this meeting. i know it will be a while before the results of this meeting are published. i know the SKS thing is hashed out i wonder what can or worms this will open.

tenpercentfirearms
07-04-2006, 2:55 PM
Ok, I finally got my letter too! I was about to throw it away when I noticed there was a weird film on the paper. I held it up to the sun light and I could barely tell someone had written something on it. I got out my old secret decoder pen set and tested the developer pen on the paper. To my surprise, there was a secret message written on the front of my letter!!!!!

The original letter before I decoded it is original.jpg.

The decoded letter is decoded.jpg.

:eek:

WhiteGT
07-04-2006, 3:20 PM
I knew it:p .

James R.
07-04-2006, 3:21 PM
Ok, I finally got my letter too! I was about to throw it away when I noticed there was a weird film on the paper. I held it up to the sun light and I could barely tell someone had written something on it. I got out my old secret decoder pen set and tested the developer pen on the paper. To my surprise, there was a secret message written on the front of my letter!!!!!

The original letter before I decoded it is original.jpg.

The decoded letter is decoded.jpg.

:eek:

Ohh Noes, someone set up us the bomb :-(

Regards,

James R.

mltrading
07-05-2006, 10:20 AM
No letter (yet).

I have NO pre-Y2K stuff.
I DO have couple of .50BMG registered several months ago.
I DO have several OLLs.

Let me wait......:)

Rumpled
07-06-2006, 10:03 PM
Got a letter today (maybe earlier, I was on vaca for a week)
I've registered a 50
I bought multiple OLL's (AR and AK)
I have a COE
I have no other registered AW's

DOJ got my name prolly from the 50 reg, though COE is likely also - they know who I am.

SemiAutoSam
07-07-2006, 8:00 AM
Ok, I finally got my letter too! I was about to throw it away when I noticed there was a weird film on the paper. I held it up to the sun light and I could barely tell someone had written something on it. I got out my old secret decoder pen set and tested the developer pen on the paper. To my surprise, there was a secret message written on the front of my letter!!!!!

The original letter before I decoded it is original.jpg.

The decoded letter is decoded.jpg.

:eek:

Good thing california gun owners arent freebasers huh

this is what they ment right

or was this written by a asian person ? not correct grammar hey wheres the spelling nazi when you need him heheh

383green
07-07-2006, 8:50 AM
Good thing california gun owners arent freebasers huh

this is what they ment right

or was this written by a asian person ? not correct grammar hey wheres the spelling nazi when you need him heheh
>whoosh!<


http://www.simlabs.arc.nasa.gov/gallery/images/images_aircraft/747united_lo.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base


;)

Bling Bling 2.0
07-07-2006, 1:08 PM
Hmm

No letter here and I'm on just about all of their mailing lists. I guess no one cares... :(

tenpercentfirearms
07-07-2006, 7:25 PM
I had a random customer come into the shop today and he received the letter and he didn't have a clue about OLLs. I think he was rather surprised to find out I was in the same small town as him and that I was knee deep in this whole affair.

SemiAutoSam
07-07-2006, 7:53 PM
>whoosh!<


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base


;)


No it just sounds like it came from the mouth of someone that was not that well educated.

It seems some kid says something these days and it just gets repeated and repeated for no good reason.

EOR

grammaton76
07-07-2006, 7:55 PM
Ah. Nah, in this case it was a badly translated Japanese game. For some good examples of how bad Japanese translations can reach a kind of comedic art form, hit:

http://www.engrish.com/

sac7000
07-07-2006, 9:41 PM
I had a random customer come into the shop today and he received the letter and he didn't have a clue about OLLs. I think he was rather surprised to find out I was in the same small town as him and that I was knee deep in this whole affair.

My local FFL gun dealer advises me very few of his customers are aware of off-list lowers. It's the same situation at my local range as well. Most think I have a registered AW until I point out the fixed magazine on my OLL or the sealed magwell on the BM Carbon 15.

I hate to say it but it appears we are a small group when compared to the rest of the shooting public. Somebody tell me I'm wrong and there are others with OLL's who have never heard of Calguns.

tenpercentfirearms
07-07-2006, 10:51 PM
Well, the longer the DOJ waits, the more there are. I am not selling them in huge numbers, but I keep on selling them.

chris
07-07-2006, 11:45 PM
the big problem with the AW issue is that most shooters do not have one nor have any interest in owning one. so they really don't care if they are banned. they are not on the band wagon of repealling the AW laws that afftect us.

they are the crowd that thinks they are not coming for their guns. well these are the people that need to pull their heads out their butts. they must be educated that they want all our guns. the AW was just the first thing to go.

let the uneducated know that the .50 ban is the worst ban yet. we know that this is the first ban on a bolt action rifle. just think if they ban ALL bolt action rifles in this state their would be no more hunting, bench shooting and the like. then these people would complain about how this could happen.

well we are our own worst enemy. you could tell them that "i told you so" before they banned their beloved rifles. but they thought their rifles would never be touched.

this is our delema the gun owning crowd must know what is at stake. we fight more than they do. they must join this fight and if we lose we know the outcome of that one don't we.

SFV_Dealer
07-09-2006, 9:22 PM
Where's my letter ? I have Pre 1999 AW registered, a CFD FFL dealer, and sold lots of lowers - where's my letter ? Sort of like Where's the Beef ? I haven't receive one single letter from DOJ since this started in December of 2005 - what's going on ? Discrimination ???
Hmmmmm....

tenpercentfirearms
07-09-2006, 9:36 PM
Maybe you will get lucky like me and they will come visit you instead. :D

leelaw
07-10-2006, 5:02 AM
Still no letter... I kinda feel left out now :p

SFV_Dealer
07-10-2006, 3:17 PM
Really - no letter from anyone - no DOJ bulletin when I log into the DROS system - no information bulletins. Is this all a wet dream ???

No, the DOJ won't come and get your guns - this new proposed law change doesn't change a thing to current law - it was intended to clarify the Harrott vs Kings case. You can still own the OLL but mag lock them so that they are no longer detachable and no longer an AW !