PDA

View Full Version : SB23 and the Aug 16 memo


Cato
09-18-2006, 9:55 PM
Was it the Aug 16 memo that stated that mag lock kits such as the Prince 50was illegal because it wasn't permanant? Anyone have a link to it? Now I was going over SB23 and noticed this part:

978.20 Definitions

The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:
(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.

Now if even a cartridge is considered a tool, then CERTAINLY the allen wrench included must be a tool as well. So, bear with this noob, the Aug 16 memo was way out of line trying to change SB23 and holds very little weight. Is this your understanding as well?

blkA4alb
09-18-2006, 9:59 PM
The memo is nothing more than an opinion. Disregard it as their latest thoughts, it has no legal implications.

hoffmang
09-18-2006, 10:35 PM
Think of the Memo as as much a wish list as the Anti's at DOJ could get away with without laughter or fraud charges. It is not law but a statement of desire.

-Gene

6172crew
09-18-2006, 10:40 PM
Think of the Memo as as much a wish list as the Anti's at DOJ could get away with without laughter or fraud charges. It is not law but a statement of desire.

-Gene

Dont expect to get invited to the next DOJ X-MAS party with that attitude.:cool:

blkA4alb
09-18-2006, 10:42 PM
Dont expect to get invited to the next DOJ X-MAS party with that attitude.:cool:
Am I still invited? :rolleyes: ;)

Cato
09-18-2006, 11:07 PM
Im flabbergasted that the DOJ would put out a memo that would so clearly conflict with SB23. Is that why the Aug 16 memo isn't on the DOJ website anymore?

Has SB23 become such a mess that it is unenforceable? I mean the burden of proof for hi cap mags are on the prosecutor, ten of thousands of OLLs are in the state, gripless rifles are entering the state at a steady rate, AB2728 lowers the penalty for possession, and soon the Sig 556 will be here in spades. Even the sealed mag well Bushies seem to be getting around the intent of SB23: a gun free society.

Joe
09-18-2006, 11:14 PM
i didnt think there was an august 15th memo... there was the may 8th(i think) memo, and that was the last one. there was the august 16 or 17th proposed regulation change though

hoffmang
09-18-2006, 11:42 PM
Both the memos and the new regulatory "clarification" certainly bring SB-23 into the cross hairs of some hard constitutional vagueness questions, don't they?

-Gene

C.G.
09-19-2006, 12:31 AM
Both the memos and the new regulatory "clarification" certainly bring SB-23 into the cross hairs of some hard constitutional vagueness questions, don't they?

-Gene

Yup. :)