PDA

View Full Version : single shot legal document.


luciferkang
04-30-2011, 6:06 PM
anybody have any legal docs stating that it's legal to remove the single shot sled from an ar pistol. a certain FFL in my area keeps harassing me at every gun show. today he scolded me in front of everybody at the gun show which was really f*cking uncalled for. sick of this clown and I want to shut him up once and for all. every other FFL there i talked to told me to tell him to STFU. sorry if my wording is a little off. only had 4 hours of sleep and worked from 8-5pm at the show. i appreciate any insight! thanks!

CSACANNONEER
04-30-2011, 6:08 PM
There is nothing in the law saying it's legal for me to take a dump in my own toilet and there is nothing saying that it is legal to remove a sled. The fact is that laws normally don't say what is legal just what isn't. So, since therre is no law against removing a sled, it is legal.

Cokebottle
04-30-2011, 6:19 PM
Tell the FFL to show you were the law says that it is illegal.

The only time the PC will state that something is legal is if it is an exception to something "normally" illegal:

Right turn on red is permitted after coming to a complete stop.
The CVC does not say that you shall proceed on a green light (because if you don't have legal control of the intersection you can't)

It is legal to bring a high capacity magazine into California if you legally possessed it within California prior to Jan 1, 2000.


The dimensionally compliant single shot exemption is very clear in the PC. There can be no question as to the legality of the initial purchase.
The PC does not prohibit a person from making modifications to their own gun.

bwiese
04-30-2011, 6:56 PM
"That which is not prohibited by law is permitted."

There is no illegality for changing a firearm from one legal form to another.

The only concern in converting a single-shot pistol into another form is that the gun does not cross thru AW status at anytime; this situtation is of course avoided by having a BulletButton-style latching maglock installed already.

Please let me know (privately) the name of the FFL.

Cokebottle
04-30-2011, 8:01 PM
The only concern in converting a single-shot pistol into another form is that the gun does not cross thru AW status at anytime; this situtation is of course avoided by having a BulletButton-style latching maglock installed already.
Which you need to properly lock the sled in place anyways.

But it's a complete non-issue for "conventional" handguns that just happen to not be on the roster.


Tell me again when the roster is going away? :twoweeks: ?

G60
04-30-2011, 8:06 PM
He doesn't understand how criminal law works. He is the one that needs to produce a document that states it is illegal.

As has already been stated in this thread a couple times before "anything that isn't illegal is legal"

Justintoxicated
04-30-2011, 8:22 PM
It's hard to prove a negative... Thats always a good debate tacit. Only positive things can be proven. Since he is the one making the claim, he needs to show proof, not the other way around.

Next time he is arguing about it in front of a bunch of people just tell him "your the one with the FFL, show me the proof!" and if he can't then ask him where he come up with the idea from.

luciferkang
04-30-2011, 8:30 PM
he said he spoke to the atf and doj. this guy has been on my a** for a few months! getting annoyed of him harassing me about my pistol at every gun show here. i think i'm just going to ignore him from now. the funny thing is that he's the one that transferred the pistol for me haha. thanks for the replies!

Cokebottle
04-30-2011, 8:39 PM
he said he spoke to the atf and doj.
First sign that he's FOS.

ATF doesn't care. The roster is a California law.

If he is not an 07, it is illegal for HIM to change the configuration of the gun before initiating DROS to you.

Cyc Wid It
04-30-2011, 9:32 PM
Somebody's mad they don't have an 07 FFL/the know how to convert guns.

Munk
04-30-2011, 9:45 PM
A: "Show me where it's legal!!!!"

You: "Show me where it's not."
...
A: "ATF and DOJ guy told me it's not"
You: "Really? did they put it in writing or were they as full of "S" as you? There's no such thing as "spoken law", all proscriptions under law are documented; this isn't one of them. The ATF doesn't care about AR pistols, and the CADOJ only bothers about them when the roster or AW law comes up. In this case, my BB kills one, and the fact that I didn't buy it from a licensed dealer in a non-roster-exempt configuration eliminates the other."

JayBeeJay
04-30-2011, 9:53 PM
Tell me again when the roster is going away? :twoweeks: ?

You moving out of CA or is there good news I'm unaware of?

Serafino
05-01-2011, 9:37 AM
You moving out of CA or is there good news I'm unaware of?

There's a littly itty-bitty question mark after the sign, I think it's meant to be a joke. ;)

SVRider
05-01-2011, 9:46 AM
"That which is not prohibited by law is permitted."

There is no illegality for changing a firearm from one legal form to another.

The only concern in converting a single-shot pistol into another form is that the gun does not cross thru AW status at anytime; this situtation is of course avoided by having a BulletButton-style latching maglock installed already.

Please let me know (privately) the name of the FFL.

I always read your posts with great respect as you are a legal expert especially when it comes to firearms law. I am not a lawyer so please receive my question with that understanding....

I was advised by one FFL that purchasing a single shot then returning the magazine to detachable status once receipt of the single-shot is complete has a problem with respect to "conspiracy to circumvent the law" (roster)....I suppose something along the lines of constructive intent.

Would you be able to speak to this point?

Thank you.

Munk
05-01-2011, 9:55 AM
I always read your posts with great respect as you are a legal expert especially when it comes to firearms law. I am not a lawyer so please receive my question with that understanding....

I was advised by one FFL that purchasing a single shot then returning the magazine to detachable status once receipt of the single-shot is complete has a problem with respect to "conspiracy to circumvent the law" (roster)....I suppose something along the lines of constructive intent.

Would you be able to speak to this point?

Thank you.

it's conspiracy to OBEY the law.

The laws concerning the roster have very clear exemptions for pistols in that condition. Mainly the OAL, Barrel length, and capacity. You are clearly putting the gun into a configuration that is consistent with the laws requirements for not being rostered.

After the purchase is made while obeying said law, there are no further laws getting between you and modifying your gun as you see fit, so long as you don't make an AW at any point. (or an NFA item, blah blah). Once it's in your posession, you mostly have to worry about posession laws.

cali_armz
05-01-2011, 1:06 PM
There's a littly itty-bitty question mark after the sign, I think it's meant to be a joke. ;)

its actually not a joke. there is a pending case against the california handgun roster.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Pena_v._Cid

http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/pena/Pena-v-Cid-Amended-Complaint.pdf

who knows how long itl take to go through though.

JayBeeJay
05-01-2011, 1:10 PM
^^^ Thanks for the links bruh!

cali_armz
05-01-2011, 1:18 PM
^^^ Thanks for the links bruh!

no problem man. its great to hear about this kind of thing though. it feels like our firearm rights just get trampled here in ca.

i almost feel like i should bring an attorney with me when i take my OLL's to the range :mad:

Cokebottle
05-01-2011, 2:32 PM
Yup.
Everything that I mentioned either has cases currently in the court system (come on Nordyke!), or various organizations have imminent plans to challenge them.

But it is low-hanging-fruit first.
The roster is an easy challenge. The basis of the current suit is that the plaintiff is left handed and disabled. This severely restricts his options for purchase of a new handgun.
Also, the roster is supposed to be about safety... but:
Certain classes of people (most notably cops, but there are others) are exempt from the roster.
Certain classes of firearms are exempt from the roster. Single shot with a barrel over 6" and an OAL over 10.5", single action revolvers with a barrel over 6", etc....
Non-rostered handguns are not prohibited from being transferred between private parties.

If it were about safety, then ALL handguns would have to be on the roster.

There are various angles of attack to this case, everything from equal protection, to ineffectiveness at attaining it's original stated goal, but the organization that brought the suit felt that the disability issue would be most easily successful.


Similar for the high-cap ban. Possession is not a crime. It is legal to import a high cap that you possessed in California prior to 2000. There are so many loopholes and exemptions written into the law that it is completely unenforceable. There are also many grounds to attack this, and Gene Hoffman is doing so (on his own, separate from CGF).


The 10 day waiting period is another piece of somewhat low hanging fruit. If they are going to call it a "cooling off period" (and they do), then what is the point in making someone who already owns one or more guns wait to pick up his purchase?

Handgun registration will be a much more difficult fight, but there are angles to attack it... but groundwork on restoring private party transfers without the requirement of an FFL will have to be done first.
Step 1 - Eliminate the FFL requirement for PPT, buyer sends his $19 and a VolReg to the DOJ
Step 2 - Work on tossing registration

Munk
05-01-2011, 3:33 PM
The 10 day waiting period is another piece of somewhat low hanging fruit. If they are going to call it a "cooling off period" (and they do), then what is the point in making someone who already owns one or more guns wait to pick up his purchase?

I like the irony of the fact that the "cooling off period" gets people steamed up.

Baconator
05-01-2011, 3:41 PM
Just tell him to go **** himself. Usually works for me when people won't leave me alone.

capitol
05-01-2011, 4:28 PM
If a 80% lower is used for an ar pistol build is the one shot sled still required "legally" before converting it over?

Baconator
05-01-2011, 4:33 PM
If a 80% lower is used for an ar pistol build is the one shot sled still required "legally" before converting it over?

No, because these types of guns don't fall under the roster.

Cokebottle
05-01-2011, 7:06 PM
If a 80% lower is used for an ar pistol build is the one shot sled still required "legally" before converting it over?
No, because these types of guns don't fall under the roster.
Misdemeanor wrong:

PC 12125(a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.

PC 12130(a) Any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person manufactured in this state, imported into the state for sale, kept for sale, or offered or exposed for sale, shall be tested within a reasonable period of time by an independent laboratory certified pursuant to subdivision (b) to determine whether that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person meets or exceeds the standards defined in Section 12126.


Whether it is built from an 80% lower or not, at the moment it becomes functional it must either be submitted for testing, or be exempt from the roster.

To be exempt from the roster, it must be:

PC 12133(a) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-action revolver that has at least a 5-cartridge capacity with a barrel length of not less than three inches, and meets any of the following specifications:
(1) Was originally manufactured prior to 1900 and is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(2) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 7 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.
(3) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 7 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled and that is currently approved for importation into the United States pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (3) of subsection (d) of Section 925 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
(b) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-shot pistol with a barrel length of not less than six inches and that has an overall length of at least 10 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.


Don't confuse assault weapon laws (which the bullet button avoids) with other manufacturing requirements. Every AR/AK pistol built at a Calguns build party has the sled installed (and the appropriate length barrel if the builder desires a barrel shorter than 6") when first assembled.

Baconator
05-01-2011, 7:17 PM
Misdemeanor wrong:

PC 12125(a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.

PC 12130(a) Any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person manufactured in this state, imported into the state for sale, kept for sale, or offered or exposed for sale, shall be tested within a reasonable period of time by an independent laboratory certified pursuant to subdivision (b) to determine whether that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person meets or exceeds the standards defined in Section 12126.


Whether it is built from an 80% lower or not, at the moment it becomes functional it must either be submitted for testing, or be exempt from the roster.

To be exempt from the roster, it must be:

PC 12133(a) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-action revolver that has at least a 5-cartridge capacity with a barrel length of not less than three inches, and meets any of the following specifications:
(1) Was originally manufactured prior to 1900 and is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(2) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 7 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.
(3) Has an overall length measured parallel to the barrel of at least 7 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled and that is currently approved for importation into the United States pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (3) of subsection (d) of Section 925 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
(b) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a single-shot pistol with a barrel length of not less than six inches and that has an overall length of at least 10 1/2 inches when the handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.


Don't confuse assault weapon laws (which the bullet button avoids) with other manufacturing requirements. Every AR/AK pistol built at a Calguns build party has the sled installed (and the appropriate length barrel if the builder desires a barrel shorter than 6") when first assembled.

Every day i learn something. Cokebottle, how many gun laws in this state or based on honesty? Seems like another thing that is totally unenforceable, though we must do it because it is the law.

Cokebottle
05-01-2011, 7:39 PM
Every day i learn something. Cokebottle, how many gun laws in this state or based on honesty? Seems like another thing that is totally unenforceable, though we must do it because it is the law.
Agreed.
You just have to be able to say (to your attorney) with a straight face that it was done legally.

Like my 14.5" barrel. I didn't want to (and couldn't afford to) have Riflegear do the entire assembly at once. Originally, I thought I'd go ahead and assemble it myself.
Machined out an 80%. To this day, that 80% has never had a buttstock or >16" upper attached.
I took delivery of the barrel, collected the rest of the parts, took them to Riflegear, and paid David to assemble the upper and pin/weld the FH on.

I don't know that I'll ever build an AR pistol, but I keep the completed 80% in the back of the safe so I am safe from CP charges.

Is there any documented difference between today and the day I received the un-machined 80% lower? No. No paperwork on anything, no CC transactions... other than my posts here on CGN, there's no way for the DOJ or BATFE to know that it was legal for me to receive the short barrel. Until I mentioned it here, nobody other than my wife and me knew that I had a functional lower that could legally be built into a pistol.