PDA

View Full Version : 80% pistol frames


robnbritt
06-15-2011, 6:47 PM
Are these legal to build in Ca? http://www.ktordnance.com/kto/products.php

I see alot of info on ar 80% lowers and would like to try a pistol next. Just want to make sure it is ok first.

notme92069
06-15-2011, 6:53 PM
Yes, but it has to be a single shot pistol first and then you may convert to semi auto. Do not put a rifle upper on it because it will forever be a rifle afterwards

Search is your friend. This has been covered may times here

wash
06-15-2011, 6:59 PM
Not quite true, adding a "rifle" upper will only make it an other, kind of like a cruiser shotgun. That can be converted back to a pistol without any legal issues.

What you can't do is add a stock and then go back to a pistol configuration later. Once a rifle always a rifle applies to adding a stock and if you go back to a pistol configuration later, that is considered making a short barrel rifle.

It's better to always keep it in pistol configuration and never have any question but adding a long barrel upper does not mean you can't go back to a pistol configuration.

robnbritt
06-15-2011, 7:21 PM
Ok maybe my question was not clear. Want to build a 80% 1911 not an ar pistol.

G1500
06-15-2011, 7:22 PM
Um, are you talking about AR pistol, or 1911 pistol frames?


You posted right before me. You can pill it out and are good to go, basically the same way you do an AR pistol.

Buy the 60% blank, mill it out, build it into a roster exempt single shot pistol, then you can convert it to a semi auto.

wash
06-15-2011, 7:25 PM
No problem, it still needs to be single shot to start or else you are manufacturing an "unsafe" handgun.

The only catch is that finishing a 1911 is a lot more difficult than finishing an AR lower.

robnbritt
06-15-2011, 7:35 PM
Is it required to be registered

wash
06-15-2011, 7:41 PM
No registration is required to own the gun.

If you carry it concealed without a permit, the crime is a felony if the gun is not registered but only a misdemeanor if it is registered.

If you are going to carry it, voluntary registration might be a good idea but it's up to you.

ETD1010
06-15-2011, 9:18 PM
you wouldn't need to build it into a single-shot exemption, as there is no requirement for DROS on it (assuming he mills it himself)

G1500
06-15-2011, 9:24 PM
you wouldn't need to build it into a single-shot exemption, as there is no requirement for DROS on it (assuming he mills it himself)

Wrong. You cannot manufacture an "Unsafe Handgun".

choprzrul
06-15-2011, 9:37 PM
Not a good idea unless you are rich and have time on your hands:

Build 60% pistol, leave off any kind of serial numbers, UOC, get eChecked, officer can't find serial, arrests you for unregistered gun, you sue the crap outta them for illegally detaining you and illegal search & siezure, take it to USSC and win strict scrutiny for 2A for all of us.

eh, just have fun with your gun.

G1500
06-15-2011, 9:46 PM
Not a good idea unless you are rich and have time on your hands:

Build 60% pistol, leave off any kind of serial numbers, UOC, get eChecked, officer can't find serial, arrests you for unregistered gun, you sue the crap outta them for illegally detaining you and illegal search & siezure, take it to USSC and win strict scrutiny for 2A for all of us.

eh, just have fun with your gun.

I got the free time part covered. You want to fund the operation

:43:

WTSGDYBBR
06-15-2011, 10:32 PM
Wrong. You cannot manufacture an "Unsafe Handgun".

Ca Approved list shows the tested handguns that meet the safety drop test.
You can build or manufacture not for commercial resale a pistol with no issue. I have build and know several people who have build Ak47 pistols with no issue. A pistol that is home made may not have any type of mounts for a stock to avoid a SBR from being made.

WTSGDYBBR
06-15-2011, 10:43 PM
Not a good idea unless you are rich and have time on your hands:

Build 60% pistol, leave off any kind of serial numbers, UOC, get eChecked, officer can't find serial, arrests you for unregistered gun, you sue the crap outta them for illegally detaining you and illegal search & siezure, take it to USSC and win strict scrutiny for 2A for all of us.

eh, just have fun with your gun.

You only need to register a firearm that you bought from a FFL. I believe Pre 89 firearms are not registered. California is not a forced to register state. There for because you owned a firearm that was pre 89 don't mean you have to register it. Same with building a firearm you do not need to add serial numbers to the build there is no such law. ATF say you can add serial numbers to your build to help law enforcement identify the firearm from theft but this is not enforced. Law enforcement is not allow to stop you to request to run your firearms serial number when you open carrying . Law enforcement is allow to only check to see if the firearm is unloaded . You do not even need to show ID if requested.

bwiese
06-15-2011, 10:50 PM
Ca Approved list shows the tested handguns that meet the safety drop test.

Yes, but what does that have to do with below?

You can build or manufacture not for commercial resale a pistol with no issue. I have build and know several people who have build Ak47 pistols with no issue.

Um, no.

Lack of detection does not equal legality. (This is a reash of the old, "Is it legal to drive with a dead hooker in the trunk if my taillights work?" question.)

PC12125 basically says you can't build an unsafe, nonexempt handgun.

So you instead must build a Roster-exempt dimensionally compliant single-shot pistol or single-action revolver (described in 12133PC).

If anyone starts asking you how you built your gun, you should clam up. If someone official is doing it, call an attorney.

Stop propagating BS incorrect info.

G1500
06-15-2011, 10:59 PM
Ca Approved list shows the tested handguns that meet the safety drop test.
You can build or manufacture not for commercial resale a pistol with no issue. I have build and know several people who have build Ak47 pistols with no issue. A pistol that is home made may not have any type of mounts for a stock to avoid a SBR from being made.

The drop test doesn't matter when referring to an "Unsafe handgun" considering part of the requirement is a LCI and a magazine disconnect.

Here is the relevant PC
PC 12125 (http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/4/2/1.3/s12125)

(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.

G1500
06-15-2011, 11:04 PM
AR and AK pistols in and of themselves are almost single shot exempt as they stand. They meet the criteria for OAL and barrel length (most of the time), so with the addition of a mag lock and a zero round magazine, it is built into an exempt form.

bwiese
06-15-2011, 11:43 PM
AR and AK pistols in and of themselves are almost single shot exempt as they stand. They meet the criteria for OAL and barrel length (most of the time), so with the addition of a mag lock and a zero round magazine, it is built into an exempt form.

Yup. And people shouldn't go bragging if they skipped that step on a homebrew gun.

gun toting monkeyboy
06-16-2011, 7:31 AM
Wow. those guys are willing to accept American gold and silver coins at full face value. How cool. I can use those $50 gold coins that cost upwards of $1500 to buy, and they will treat them like $50 cash. There is a deal if I have ever seen one...

NotEnufGarage
06-16-2011, 7:57 AM
Wow. those guys are willing to accept American gold and silver coins at full face value. How cool. I can use those $50 gold coins that cost upwards of $1500 to buy, and they will treat them like $50 cash. There is a deal if I have ever seen one...

I think he has some really good crack that he's smoking...

Bhobbs
06-16-2011, 8:03 AM
Not quite true, adding a "rifle" upper will only make it an other, kind of like a cruiser shotgun. That can be converted back to a pistol without any legal issues.

What you can't do is add a stock and then go back to a pistol configuration later. Once a rifle always a rifle applies to adding a stock and if you go back to a pistol configuration later, that is considered making a short barrel rifle.

It's better to always keep it in pistol configuration and never have any question but adding a long barrel upper does not mean you can't go back to a pistol configuration.

This is idiotic. Hopefully this regulation will be taken down in the future.

wash
06-16-2011, 9:06 AM
I agree, but it has been that way since 1934 I think...

WTSGDYBBR
06-16-2011, 3:53 PM
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.

First line says it all For Sale. There are no listed Ar type or Ak Type pistols on the cal approved list. Matter of fact because there is no rear Trunnions that can attach a stock your in the clear. So having a 0 shot sled or a 10 round mag you do not need to register a home made hand gun. Law enforcement cannot arrest you if you have a firearm that you built with no serial numbers. The California approved list don't mean crap.You can own almost any hand gun here.Dros as a single shot pistol.



Yes, but what does that have to do with below?



Um, no.

Lack of detection does not equal legality. (This is a reash of the old, "Is it legal to drive with a dead hooker in the trunk if my taillights work?" question.)

PC12125 basically says you can't build an unsafe, nonexempt handgun.

So you instead must build a Roster-exempt dimensionally compliant single-shot pistol or single-action revolver (described in 12133PC).

If anyone starts asking you how you built your gun, you should clam up. If someone official is doing it, call an attorney.

Stop propagating BS incorrect info.

bwiese
06-16-2011, 4:08 PM
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.

First line says it all For Sale. There are no listed Ar type or Ak Type pistols on the cal approved list. Matter of fact because there is no rear Trunnions that can attach a stock your in the clear. So having a 0 shot sled or a 10 round mag you do not need to register a home made hand gun. Law enforcement cannot arrest you if you have a firearm that you built with no serial numbers. The California approved list don't mean crap.You can own almost any hand gun here.Dros as a single shot pistol.

Um, I know all the above .... because I was the guy that created the single-shot conversion Roster exemption game plan some time ago for AR, AK and other pistols. I

Again, what I am saying is that IF YOU BUILD A HANDGUN, you NEED TO BUILD IT IN EXEMPT FORM FIRST (dimensionally compliant single shot, for example). 12125 says if you manufacture an unsafe handgun, it's a problem.

Commas are important.

WTSGDYBBR
06-16-2011, 4:26 PM
Um, I know all the above .... because I was the guy that created the single-shot conversion Roster exemption game plan some time ago for AR, AK and other pistols. I

Again, what I am saying is that IF YOU BUILD A HANDGUN, you NEED TO BUILD IT IN EXEMPT FORM FIRST (dimensionally compliant single shot, for example). 12125 says if you manufacture an unsafe handgun, it's a problem.

Commas are important.

I don't disagree with what yours saying. I also understand by not building a firearm in a EXEMPT FORM FIRST could led it as being a unsafe handgun. I'm sorry that I did not take the time write the rules and regulations on how to build a firearm in my post. But that not right for you to say I'm "propagating BS incorrect info". We are all here to help each other out not to give people incorrect info.

robnbritt
06-16-2011, 6:48 PM
So what I am getting from this is -
1- I can build the 1911 if I build it as a single shot
2- After single shot build is completed then I can convert it to a semi-auto.
3- I do not need to dros or register it.

I have no intentions to carry (concelaed or UOC) this build just want to try to build one for personal satisfaction.

I just don't want to end up on the news

Bhobbs
06-16-2011, 6:50 PM
Is there a time period you should keep the gun in a single shot form for? 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day etc?

CHS
06-16-2011, 7:36 PM
So what I am getting from this is -
1- I can build the 1911 if I build it as a single shot
2- After single shot build is completed then I can convert it to a semi-auto.
3- I do not need to dros or register it.


Correct on all points. However, the "exempt" form is NOT simply "single-shot". There are other requirements which are a 6" minimum barrel length and minimum 10.5" overall length. Once you've met all three of those requirements, it's exempt from the roster.

Is there a time period you should keep the gun in a single shot form for? 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day etc?

Only for as long as it takes you to convert from exempt back to normal.

G1500
06-16-2011, 7:50 PM
Is there a time period you should keep the gun in a single shot form for? 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day etc?

Pretty much once you complete the build (in single shot form of course) by putting the last part in its place you have manufactured an exempt firearm. There is really no time period. I say put it together, set it down, pick it back up and convert it to semi.

goober
06-16-2011, 8:11 PM
if you're building a (dimensionally compliant) AR pistol, can you build it in a single-shot configuration by leaving the gas tube off, instead of using a sled?

wildhawker
06-16-2011, 8:21 PM
if you're building a (dimensionally compliant) AR pistol, can you build it in a single-shot configuration by leaving the gas tube off, instead of using a sled?

A DI AR without the tube will not cycle the action, so it effectively becomes a single-shot action in that state. The statute (PC 12133(b)) offers no qualification that the exempt pistol contain or hold only one round of ammunition at a time.

Note that (a) requires the exempt single-action revolver to have at least a 5-cartridge capacity.

-Brandon

Bhobbs
06-16-2011, 8:21 PM
Pretty much once you complete the build (in single shot form of course) by putting the last part in its place you have manufactured an exempt firearm. There is really no time period. I say put it together, set it down, pick it back up and convert it to semi.

Makes sense.

goober
06-16-2011, 8:35 PM
if you're building a (dimensionally compliant) AR pistol, can you build it in a single-shot configuration by leaving the gas tube off, instead of using a sled?

A DI AR without the tube will not cycle the action, so it effectively becomes a single-shot action in that state. The statute (PC 12133(b)) offers no qualification that the exempt pistol contain or hold only one round of ammunition at a time.

Note that (a) requires the exempt single-action revolver to have at least a 5-cartridge capacity.

-Brandon

thot so.... thanks :D

robnbritt
06-16-2011, 8:56 PM
Correct on all points. However, the "exempt" form is NOT simply "single-shot". There are other requirements which are a 6" minimum barrel length and minimum 10.5" overall length. Once you've met all three of those requirements, it's exempt from the roster.

So I would need to put a 6" barrel on a 1911 frame and be 10.5" oal to be roster exempt? How is that even possible? My delta gold cup is 8.8" oal with a 5" barrel.

Tripper
06-16-2011, 9:04 PM
I think
complete it
Set it down
TAKE A PICTURE OF IT
then pick it up and do the rest
that way you have a picture of it being in its 'exempt' configuration.

G1500
06-16-2011, 9:11 PM
So I would need to put a 6" barrel on a 1911 frame and be 10.5" oal to be roster exempt? How is that even possible? My delta gold cup is 8.8" oal with a 5" barrel.

It is possible.

You would also need to put a magazine lock with a zero round magazine or block off the mag well.

Although if you bought it before 1/1/2001 then you did not need to do this, you also do not need to do this if you are buying it PPT or having it gifted to you through intrafamiliar transfer.

goober
06-16-2011, 9:13 PM
So I would need to put a 6" barrel on a 1911 frame and be 10.5" oal to be roster exempt? How is that even possible? My delta gold cup is 8.8" oal with a 5" barrel.

sounds like you need a 7"+ barrel...

goober
06-16-2011, 9:16 PM
It is possible.

You would also need to put a magazine lock with a zero round magazine or block off the mag well.

Although if you bought it before 1/1/2001 then you did not need to do this, you also do not need to do this if you are buying it PPT or having it gifted to you through intrafamiliar transfer.

OP is talking about building a 1911-style pistol from an 80% paperweight....
your statement about maglock/sled is relevant, but the latter ones are not.

G1500
06-16-2011, 9:24 PM
OP is talking about building a 1911-style pistol from an 80% paperweight....
your statement about maglock/sled is relevant, but the latter ones are not.

He made that post seem like he already had a Gold Cup, and asked if he needed to put one on.

If he is building it he does, if he already has one he doesn't.

goober
06-16-2011, 9:32 PM
He made that post seem like he already had a Gold Cup, and asked if he needed to put one on.

If he is building it he does, if he already has one he doesn't.

i interpreted the Gold Cup reference as an example of typical OAL for a 1911 style pistol, using something he already owns.
OP was wondering how he would build a dimensionally compliant 1911 from an 80% paperweight given that his Gold Cup is only 8.8" OAL.

i may have misinterpreted, but anyway no big. it's all info.

G1500
06-16-2011, 9:37 PM
i interpreted the Gold Cup reference as an example of typical OAL for a 1911 style pistol, using something he already owns.
OP was wondering how he would build a dimensionally compliant 1911 from an 80% paperweight given that his Gold Cup is only 8.8" OAL.

i may have misinterpreted, but anyway no big. it's all info.

It was probably me who misinterpreted it. Took a sleeping pill around 7, things are slowing down now. I'm sure it will be explained later.

:cool:

Edit: Yes, I guess that makes sense after reading it again. lol/

CHS
06-16-2011, 10:55 PM
A DI AR without the tube will not cycle the action, so it effectively becomes a single-shot action in that state. The statute (PC 12133(b)) offers no qualification that the exempt pistol contain or hold only one round of ammunition at a time.


Brandon, I would be VERY careful about this statement.

A "single-shot" pistol is quite clearly, SINGLE shot. Not a pull-action or bolt-action repeater (remember when they used to call them repeaters?).

A T/C Encore or Contender is literally a single-shot handgun.

An AR pistol with a gas tube removed IS NOT a single-shot handgun. It's a pull-action repeater.

My break-action single-shot 12ga is a single shot shotgun. I would never in a million years call my 5+1 870 a "single shot pump-action shotgun". It's just not true.

If the PC does not define what "single shot pistol" means, then you have to go by commonly accepted standard industry definitions. Something that has a 10rd capacity and is bolt action would not be considered by ANYONE in the firearms industry to be "single shot".

AIMSMALL
06-16-2011, 11:46 PM
Um, I know all the above .... because I was the guy that created the single-shot conversion Roster exemption game plan some time ago for AR, AK and other pistols. I

Again, what I am saying is that IF YOU BUILD A HANDGUN, you NEED TO BUILD IT IN EXEMPT FORM FIRST (dimensionally compliant single shot, for example). 12125 says if you manufacture an unsafe handgun, it's a problem.

Commas are important.

:King:

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 1:46 AM
CHS, I think there's wisdom in being cautious when interpreting that statute. However, there's no definition or regulation that states single shot is equal to no capacity to stow ammunition.

CHS
06-17-2011, 8:29 AM
CHS, I think there's wisdom in being cautious when interpreting that statute. However, there's no definition or regulation that states single shot is equal to no capacity to stow ammunition.

Stowing ammunition is a far cry from feeding ammunition.

A side saddle stows ammo. A magazine in the magwell feeds ammo and turns the gun into a repeater even if the semi-auto action has been disabled.

Bhobbs
06-17-2011, 8:34 AM
Stowing ammunition is a far cry from feeding ammunition.

A side saddle stows ammo. A magazine in the magwell feeds ammo and turns the gun into a repeater even if the semi-auto action has been disabled.

I have to agree with this. Single shot bolt actions do not have a mag well. When they have a mag well they are repeaters.

It may be overly cautious but it's not worth the risk when you are changing it over later anyways.

goober
06-17-2011, 8:44 AM
surely maglocking one of these (or similar) in place w/ a BB would satisfy the single shot requirement, no?

http://spinstage.http.internapcdn.net/Spinstage/userdocs/products/p_702004015_1.jpg

sorry OP for the AR-pistol threadjack :o

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 9:15 AM
Stowing ammunition is a far cry from feeding ammunition.

A side saddle stows ammo. A magazine in the magwell feeds ammo and turns the gun into a repeater even if the semi-auto action has been disabled.

While I agree the ammunition is generally "fed" from a magazine, in the case of a weapon such as we're discussing here it's immaterial and so I won't belabor the magazine argument. The mechanism of moving on-board ammunition into a position capable of being fired - in the absence of any machine gun or semi-auto action - informs nothing more than the existence of a single-action firearm that places another single unspent round (a "single shot") in a position capable of being fired when necessarily manually worked.

Your argument, as I understand it, turns on a presumption that a DI firearm with the gas tube removed is quai-legally reclassified as a "repeater" because the action can be worked manually. However, no support for that argument, the term of art "repeater", or a definition for that term exists anywhere in statute or regulation. I don't recall having ever read anything that would legally distinguish a single-shot pump-action rifle from a single-shot T/C Contender rifle in the eyes of California's government.

If you know any any PC or regulation which goes to the specific behavior of a firearm's action beyond machine guns and semi-automatic I would be very interested.

-Brandon

CHS
06-17-2011, 9:53 AM
While I agree the ammunition is generally "fed" from a magazine, in the case of a weapon such as we're discussing here it's immaterial and so I won't belabor the magazine argument. The mechanism of moving on-board ammunition into a position capable of being fired - in the absence of any machine gun or semi-auto action - informs nothing more than the existence of a single-action firearm that places another single unspent round (a "single shot") in a position capable of being fired when necessarily manually worked.


Single-action is different, and only single-action revolvers are exempted from the roster. Otherwise every single 1911 would automatically be exempt.


Your argument, as I understand it, turns on a presumption that a DI firearm with the gas tube removed is quai-legally reclassified as a "repeater" because the action can be worked manually. However, no support for that argument, the term of art "repeater", or a definition for that term exists anywhere in statute or regulation. I don't recall having ever read anything that would legally distinguish a single-shot pump-action rifle from a single-shot T/C Contender rifle in the eyes of California's government.

If you know any any PC or regulation which goes to the specific behavior of a firearm's action beyond machine guns and semi-automatic I would be very interested.


"Single Shot", while not statutorily defined, is quite well defined and understood in the industry. Without a definition in the penal code the law is going to default to standard industry terms (and should the matter be brought up in court, will question industry experts).

You're basically saying that any firearm that's not a semi-auto or revolver (ignoring title 2's for now) is a "single shot" firearm for the purposes of California law.

Honestly, I think that position is absurd.

Pump-action shotguns are not "single shot" firearms.
Bolt-action rifles with magazines are not "single shot" firearms.
Ruger Model 1's are single-shot firearms.
T/C Encores and Contenders are single-shot firearms.

You would also have to look at the statutory history of the roster itself. When initially enacted, the roster did NOT exempt single-shot pistols. T/C stopped selling their firearms in California because of this. The way the roster was written, they would basically have had to have tested several thousand combinations of barrels/receivers/finishes in order to get a decent quantity of their pistols onto the roster. The roster was then changed to exempt "Single Shot" pistols such as the T/C Encore and Contender.

In other words, what you're telling me is that the Rossi Ranch Hand, absent of ANY modifications, is roster-exempt. Since it's a lever-action, mag-fed pistol and not a revolver or semi-auto, it apparently meets your definition of "single-shot". And since it has a greater than 6" barrel and greater than 10.5" OAL, it's exempt in its factory configuration.

Correct?

ke6guj
06-17-2011, 10:39 AM
Wow. those guys are willing to accept American gold and silver coins at full face value. How cool. I can use those $50 gold coins that cost upwards of $1500 to buy, and they will treat them like $50 cash. There is a deal if I have ever seen one...
I would comment that those gold/silver prices were set ~5 years ago, when gold/silver were a lot cheaper. Silver was <15 an ounce at the time, and it was often cheaper to pay in PM vs. those FRNs. But with rising PM princes, he has not adjusted his pricing at all.

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 12:14 PM
Single-action is different, and only single-action revolvers are exempted from the roster.

I agree here, and note that the single-action revolvers that are exempted are "at least" 5 rounds in capacity and place an unspent cartridge in a position of being fired every time one manually works the action. However, single-action and single shot are not necessarily mutually exclusive. (b) speaks directly to single shot handguns, comprehensively, while (a) is a narrower carve-out for single action revolvers only.

"Single Shot", while not statutorily defined, is quite well defined and understood in the industry. Without a definition in the penal code the law is going to default to standard industry terms (and should the matter be brought up in court, will question industry experts).

Sounds like a criminal prosecution (under PC 12125) based on an unconstitutionally vague scheme of regulating "unsafe" handguns, to me.

You're basically saying that any firearm that's not a semi-auto or revolver (ignoring title 2's for now) is a "single shot" firearm for the purposes of California law.

Honestly, I think that position is absurd.

Please, then, point out to me anywhere in statute, regs, or case law that contradicts my argument.

Pump-action shotguns are not "single shot" firearms.
Bolt-action rifles with magazines are not "single shot" firearms.
Ruger Model 1's are single-shot firearms.
T/C Encores and Contenders are single-shot firearms.

You're simply applying terms of art as you see them.

You would also have to look at the statutory history of the roster itself. When initially enacted, the roster did NOT exempt single-shot pistols. T/C stopped selling their firearms in California because of this. The way the roster was written, they would basically have had to have tested several thousand combinations of barrels/receivers/finishes in order to get a decent quantity of their pistols onto the roster. The roster was then changed to exempt "Single Shot" pistols such as the T/C Encore and Contender.

I'm going to be prosecuted under PC 12125 because a reasonable person can be expected to undertake a substantial legislative history and legal analysis for a statue that simply says "single shot"? Sorry, my gun only shoots once and cannot fire again without me doing manual work to extract the spent round and chamber an unspent round.

In other words, what you're telling me is that the Rossi Ranch Hand, absent of ANY modifications, is roster-exempt. Since it's a lever-action, mag-fed pistol and not a revolver or semi-auto, it apparently meets your definition of "single-shot". And since it has a greater than 6" barrel and greater than 10.5" OAL, it's exempt in its factory configuration.

Correct?

Are you asking if I suggest people attempt to acquire one this way, or are you asking if I would based on the theory offered above? In my view, the Ranch Hand does not not meet the definition of a single-shot exempt firearm as found in PC 12133(b).

CHS
06-17-2011, 12:25 PM
Are you asking if I suggest people attempt to acquire one this way, or are you asking if I would based on the theory offered above? In my view, the Ranch Hand does not not meet the definition of a single-shot exempt firearm as found in PC 12133(b).

Then please explain yourself.

If a Rossi Ranch Hand does not meet the definition of a single-shot exempt firearm, then how does an AR with gas tube removed and a fixed magazine pass the test?

In your own words you have described the EXACT action of firing both the above firearms. So what makes the Ranch Hand different?
Sorry, my gun only shoots once and cannot fire again without me doing manual work to extract the spent round and chamber an unspent round.

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 12:27 PM
Nothing- that's my point ("not not"). Am I suggesting people adopt my theory? No, because I don't disagree that some risk exists for a ride, even if there's no rap.

CHS
06-17-2011, 12:41 PM
Nothing- that's my point ("not not"). Am I suggesting people adopt my theory? No, because I don't disagree that some risk exists for a ride, even if there's no rap.

Now you're not making any sense.

Just to be clear, what you have now said is that:

1.) An AR pistol, with gas system removed or disabled, and a fixed magazine installed, is roster-exempt as a "single-shot" firearm, even though it will allow repeated action and firing of the gun via a straight-pull action of the charging handle/bolt.

2.) A Rossi Ranch hand, with a fixed magazine, is not roster exempt as a "single-shot" firearm, even though it will allow repeated action and firing of the gun via the movement of a lever located beneath the gun.

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 12:45 PM
No, that's not correct.

Please reconsider my post #51. I need to run for a few hours but if there's still confusion I'll reply tonight.

-Brandon

Now you're not making any sense.

Just to be clear, what you have now said is that:

1.) An AR pistol, with gas system removed or disabled, and a fixed magazine installed, is roster-exempt as a "single-shot" firearm, even though it will allow repeated action and firing of the gun via a straight-pull action of the charging handle/bolt.

2.) A Rossi Ranch hand, with a fixed magazine, is not roster exempt as a "single-shot" firearm, even though it will allow repeated action and firing of the gun via the movement of a lever located beneath the gun.

ke6guj
06-17-2011, 12:47 PM
Chris, he is doing a double-negative there.

He was saying that the Rossi Ranch Hand was NOT "not roster exempt", meaning that it was roster-exempt. I figured out what he meant when he Italicized one of the nots.

bwiese
06-17-2011, 1:33 PM
CHS, I think there's wisdom in being cautious when interpreting that statute. However, there's no definition or regulation that states single shot is equal to no capacity to stow ammunition.

Um, "stow" vs "stow in a place that can fee" are two different things.

Yes, a 1911 with Springfield SASS/ Pachmayr Dominator upper can have an open magwell because that magwell is irrelevant as it CANNOT feed the upper.

A 1911 with an unblocked magwell is NOT a single-shot and would fall into 'repeater' category - it is undiffered from an acknowledged multishot handgun feed system. Expert witnesses would concur. Single-shot status is an acknowledged term of industry and there are exemplars.

We are best served by emulating the topology of known single-shot pistols (Rem XP100 w/blocked well, T/C Contender, 1911 w/rifle conversion upper, etc.)

wildhawker
06-17-2011, 2:13 PM
Not sure how we're getting to semi auto 1911 from my post.

My contention is simply that there's no legal authority to claim a firearm such as that discussed above is not single shot. Is it clearly a single shot? No, but neither is the statute.

Without projecting our own views of definitions on the code, there's simply no basis to dismiss the AR with gas tube removed but for the aversion to risk of a charge of violating 12125.