PDA

View Full Version : Single Shot Exemption for Ruger Charger?


Excelsior
02-10-2012, 6:02 PM
I've read some threads on the SSE but I want to make sure I am not missing anything.

I order and pay for a Charger from someone willing to ship to my local FFL. When it arrives I open the box in the back room of the shop, remove the magazine (which I stick in my pocket) and install a plate (which requires a tool to remove) blocking the insertion of another magazine (or I might just swap-out stocks with one that already has a blocked magazine port.)

Then my FFL processes the firearm as a single shot pistol and I pick it up after the required wait Anything more to it? Does the payment/sale of the gun have to take place after the conversion or would I be OK as described? Thanks.

When I travel out of state to NV or AZ, is it legal for me to remove the blocking plate as long as I re-install it before reentering CA? Thanks again.

aklover_91
02-10-2012, 6:08 PM
You can remove the blocking plate as soon as you pick it up, provided you have it set up with a bullet button type deal.

Single shot is only necessary for transfer from the dealer, not possession.

morrcarr67
02-10-2012, 6:08 PM
No. This gun is a AW in native form. Unless your ffl has an AW permit it must be modified before it comes into CA.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 6:15 PM
No. This gun is a AW in native form. Unless your ffl has an AW permit it must be modified before it comes into CA.

Are you sure about that? I read in a few places where AWs can be shipped to CA so long as they are converted to non-AW status prior prior to processing. Further that Type 1 FFLs (typical gun shop) can do such conversions that once required a Type 7 FFL holder. I'm curious also if there is a distinction between buying such a firearm and having it shipped to my FFL versus actually buying it from my FFL here in CA?

I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain.

bigcalidave
02-10-2012, 6:32 PM
Haha, missing the point of the Single shot there buddy! As soon as you own it, turn it back into a semi auto. With a magazine lock though, and 10 rd mags ONLY, you can have a threaded barrel. No need to keep it a single shot in this state.

HOWEVER with a charger, you have to leave a magazine lock on there, because its a handgun with a magazine outside of the pistol grip which is what triggers the AW status. Morrcarr is right, they need an AW permit or it should be magazine locked out of state.


I'm building a Charger from an 80% now / soon, should be fun!

CSACANNONEER
02-10-2012, 7:11 PM
Are you sure about that? I read in a few places where AWs can be shipped to CA so long as they are converted to non-AW status prior prior to processing. Further that Type 1 FFLs (typical gun shop) can do such conversions that once required a Type 7 FFL holder. I'm curious also if there is a distinction between buying such a firearm and having it shipped to my FFL versus actually buying it from my FFL here in CA?

I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain.

I'm certain that you CAN legally install a magazine lock (Assualt Planet does not make a "Bullet Button" for it and, they are the ONLY ones legally able to call their mag locks "Bullet Buttons") and then remove the blocking plate".

I'm also certain that an FFL needs an AW Permit to receive an AW period.

Also, I would NEVER put an 01FFL into the situation where you are asking him/her to modify a firearm and "add value to it". That does require an 07FLL.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 8:22 PM
Goodness gracious! Sort of like a gun shop in here...

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 8:44 PM
"Also, I would NEVER put an 01FFL into the situation where you are asking him/her to modify a firearm and "add value to it". That does require an 07FLL." <--- Wrong. That's like suggesting an Type 1 FFL cannot (for example) change out a stock or cut and re-crown a barrel or install some new sights on a firearm.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 8:56 PM
From http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=383692

"Section 2: Explanation

- This conversion MUST be done by an 07 FFL, or can be done by a private party (unlikely for them to have the parts) prior to shipping.
*update* An 07 FFL is now no longer required for this process. If you can find an 01 FFL with the knowledge/willingness to do these conversions, you can. I will continue to update the list of shops who will perform this service.
- Depending on availability and specific shop policies, you may order from an FFL, transfer from Gunbroker, etc.
- This reversible conversion generally entails a replacement barrel of greater length and a mag lock (not revolvers). There are no permanent modifications to the gun.
- Keep in mind that certain guns, due to the nature of demand and or design, will be prohibitively expensive or not readily available to be converted.
- Either complete DROS at that 07 FFL or have it shipped to an FFL who is willing to accept guns in this format. Note, this may require a deposit on the parts from the 07FFL.
- Take possession of the gun after DROS.
- Return the gun to its original configuration (note, for guns with the magazine outside of the grip, a bullet button must be used, and you cannot use "normal capacity" magazines)."

So if a Type 1 FFL (as well as a Type 7) can receive such a firearm then my only question would be one of payment. In the past I have bought a firearm and had it delivered to my local FFL for processing. Sounds like that would still be OK based on the above or would I actually need to pay my local FFL for the gun?

CSACANNONEER
02-10-2012, 9:18 PM
I have not seen any advise that is incorrect or conflicts with anyone else's advise. So, how is this "like a gunshop"?

In this case, the FFL will probably have to MANUFACTURE parts instead of using "drop in" parts. Since you will probably want to go through an out of state FFL to manufacture and install a magazine lock (then all you need is a sled) before the gun gets into CAlifornia, you will need to use an 007FFL. Or, are you planning on using a FFL with a Ca AW permit? If so, you better clear the whole concept with him before you procede. Otherwise, how do you propose to install a mag lock without, at some point, manufacturing an AW for a brief while? Also, there is a difference between gunsmithing a client's gun and adding value to a gun as part of the initial sale. Since your project involves manufacturing and installing parts which are required to be there at the time of the initial transfer to you, an 07 is clearly the correct choice.

One of us is clearly missing something. Do you really think any FFL in CA can legally receive unregistered (or registered) AWs without a permit and then modify them? Do you really think that manufacturing a mag lock and sled is "using drop in parts"? Is it possible to manufacture and install a mag lock BEFORE removing the blocking plate? I am not familar with "blocking plates" so, that might be one thing that is confusing me.

Have you spoken with your local FFL about this yet? If not, why don't you start there and see where it goes?

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 9:37 PM
I have not seen any advise that is incorrect or conflicts with anyone else's advise. So, how is this "like a gunshop"?

YOU: "Also, I would NEVER put an 01FFL into the situation where you are asking him/her to modify a firearm and "add value to it". That does require an 07FLL."

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=383692 "This conversion MUST be done by an 07 FFL, or can be done by a private party (unlikely for them to have the parts) prior to shipping. *update* An 07 FFL is now no longer required for this process. If you can find an 01 FFL with the knowledge/willingness to do these conversions, you can."

Which is right?

In this case, the FFL will probably have to MANUFACTURE parts instead of using "drop in" parts. Since you will probably want to go through an out of state FFL to manufacture and install a magazine lock (then all you need is a sled) before the gun gets into CAlifornia, you will need to use an 007FFL. Or, are you planning on using a FFL with a Ca AW permit? If so, you better clear the whole concept with him before you procede. Otherwise, how do you propose to install a mag lock without, at some point, manufacturing an AW for a brief while? Also, there is a difference between gunsmithing a client's gun and adding value to a gun as part of the initial sale. Since your project involves manufacturing and installing parts which are required to be there at the time of the initial transfer to you, an 07 is clearly the correct choice.

Now you're changing your story. First you said a Type 1 FFL cannot "modify" or "add value" to a firearm. Now you are saying the Type 1 FFL cannot manufacture a part. Big difference. I also never mentioned that he would be fabricating anything -- I mentioned a part (magazine port blocking plate) would be installed at the local FFL's shop. Please don't infer otherwise.

If you would have read my initial posting you would have also noted that I would already legally own -- in other words I have already paid the seller (but not yet DROSed) the firearm in the scenario I outlined and I specifically asked if that would be a problem?

One of us is clearly missing something. Do you really think any FFL in CA can legally receive unregistered (or registered) AWs without a permit and then modify them? Do you really think that manufacturing a mag lock and sled is "using drop in parts"? Is it possible to manufacture and install a mag lock BEFORE removing the blocking plate? I am not familar with "blocking plates" so, that might be one thing that is confusing me.

Take a look at your "modify"/"adding value" comment. Not once did I mention he would be fabricating any part(s.) What I said was:

"...I open the box in the back room of the shop, remove the magazine (which I stick in my pocket) and install a plate (which requires a tool to remove) blocking the insertion of another magazine..."

My question is important to me. I've already read quite a bit on this subject but I was looking for any red flags. One person did point something of interest -- with a magazine lock one could use a magazine of 10 or fewer rounds, although in that configuration on not sure how you get around the roster matter.

You on the other hand made statements and then tried to spin them after I responded. That's bad form. No wonder people get tied-up in knots when they investigate taking on a project in good faith.

CSACANNONEER
02-10-2012, 9:58 PM
YOU: "Also, I would NEVER put an 01FFL into the situation where you are asking him/her to modify a firearm and "add value to it". That does require an 07FLL."

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=383692 "This conversion MUST be done by an 07 FFL, or can be done by a private party (unlikely for them to have the parts) prior to shipping. *update* An 07 FFL is now no longer required for this process. If you can find an 01 FFL with the knowledge/willingness to do these conversions, you can."

Which is right?

Both are right. You have not dug deep enough. An 01FFL can do a SSE with DROP IN parts. In your case, there is no DROP IN mag lock so, an 07 will need to MANUFACTURE something and install it and, thereby adding value to it before it comes into California and before the transfer to you is completed.




Now you're changing your story. First you said a Type 1 FFL cannot "modify" or "add value" to a firearm. Now you are saying the Type 1 FFL cannot manufacture a part. Big difference. I also never mentioned that he would be fabricating anything -- I mentioned a part (magazine port blocking plate) would be installed at the local FFL's shop. Please don't infer otherwise.
Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW. Again, I would talk to your local FFL and see what permits they have, what their knowledge of the law is and their comfort level. But, it would be a FELONY to remove the blocking plate AT your FFL unless the mag lock was already in place. Can you do it that way? I don't know. If you can't, you will need the mag lock installed out of state and a sled installed instead of a blocking plate.


Take a look at your "modify"/"adding value" comment. Not once did I mention he would be fabricating any part(s.) Even if I did there's probably more time and machine work in cutting a barrel, re-crowning it and cutting a new dovetail for a front sight then what I have in mind.

My question is important to me. I've already read quite a bit on this subject but I was looking for any red flags. One person did point something out of interest -- with a magazine lock one could use a magazine of 10 or fewer rounds, although in that configuration on not sure how you get around the roster matter.

You on the other hand made statements and then tried to spin them after I responded. That's bad form.

Again, there are NO "DROP IN" parts available. The FFL will HAVE TO MANUFACTURE a mag lock BEFORE the transfer to you is completed. IT will require DESIGNING, FABRICATING and INSTALLING one of parts. ATF has given their opinion many times that adding value PRIOR to transfer is something for 07 FFLS to do, not 01FFLs.

Finally, I'm not trying to spin anything. I just don't think one of us is grasping everything involved in doing this SSE. I'm not sure which one of us that is. It could easily be me. I'm definately unsure exactly how this blocking plate is installed or exactly how it functions. Personally, I'd feel much more comfortable with a mag lock and sled. That way, I could easily convert it to use 10 round (or less) magazines. However, it is also obvious that you don't completely understand SSEs since, you stated that "I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain." Which, now you know is obviously wrong.

I will suggest that you go back to the thread that you just quoted about no longer needing an 07 FFL and reread the entire thread and the thread it links to. You will find that there is still a need for an 07FFL when it comes to SSEs like the one you are proposing.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 10:30 PM
Both are right. You have not dug deep enough. An 01FFL can do a SSE with DROP IN parts. In your case, there is no DROP IN mag lock so, an 07 will need to MANUFACTURE something and install it and, thereby adding value to it before it comes into California and before the transfer to you is completed.

Bunkum. First, I (or anyone other than that specific FFL) could make the part. I also don't know for certain that making something to block the installation of a magazine (it could be as simple as cross-drilling a hole through the stock and installing a bolt) would require an Type 7 FFL if they can indeed do things like install "DROP IN" parts -- not to mention machine work like cutting barrels, cutting dovetails, re-crowning barrels, etc. etc. etc.

You brought up a NEW variable this time around. Does it need to be done before it ships to CA? That might well be the case but you didn't mention it the first time through nor did anyone else. Given the fact there are FFL's that convert AWs into legal weapons here in CA I suspect that might not be the case but I don't know for sure.

Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW. Again, I would talk to your local FFL and see what permits they have, what their knowledge of the law is and their comfort level. But, it would be a FELONY to remove the blocking plate AT your FFL unless the mag lock was already in place. Can you do it that way? I don't know. If you can't, you will need the mag lock installed out of state and a sled installed instead of a blocking plate.

What are you even saying? Let me parse this sentence: "Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW."

What does that have to do with my posting? Are you responding to my question about the legality of removing the magazine blocking plate when I physically have the firearm outside of CA? Otherwise I never mentioned removing the blocking plate. I mentioned installing one after removing the magazine.

Again, there are NO "DROP IN" parts available. The FFL will HAVE TO MANUFACTURE a mag lock BEFORE the transfer to you is completed. IT will require DESIGNING, FABRICATING and INSTALLING one of parts. ATF has given their opinion many times that adding value PRIOR to transfer is something for 07 FFLS to do, not 01FFLs.

Your "drop-in" argument has already failed. Anyone could make the part. There is no requirement that it be a stock item available to everyone. You also fail on the "added value" argument. "Dropping-in" a commercially purchased part is not different than "dropping-in" a part that the owner made/brought-in to be installed. Both add the same amount of value too.

Finally, I'm not trying to spin anything. I just don't think one of us is grasping everything involved in doing this SSE. I'm not sure which one of us that is. It could easily be me. I'm definately unsure exactly how this blocking plate is installed or exactly how it functions. Personally, I'd feel much more comfortable with a mag lock and sled. That way, I could easily convert it to use 10 round (or less) magazines. However, it is also obvious that you don't completely understand SSEs since, you stated that "I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain." Which, now you know is obviously wrong.

I recognized my misunderstanding in my earlier posting -- I'm glad someone brought it to my attention and it wasn't you. So far you have failed to recognize the fallacious comments you have made.

I will suggest that you go back to the thread that you just quoted about no longer needing an 07 FFL and reread the entire thread and the thread it links to. You will find that there is still a need for an 07FFL when it comes to SSEs like the one you are proposing.

Maybe you could post the comments for me? I seem to have missed them the first time I read them -- along with the adding value part, the manufacture part, the exemption of commercially available "drop-in" parts, etc. This is exactly the sort of bunkum that gets flung around so many gun shops. Ask an honest questions and receive bunkum (often with a large dose of scorn) in return.

Quiet
02-10-2012, 10:42 PM
In order to legally recieve an imported assault weapon, the CA FFL dealer must have a valid assault weapons permit.

Unless the recieving CA FFL dealer has a valid assault weapons permit, the "assault weapon" needs to be made CA legal prior to importation.

Otherwise, the CA FFL dealer is in violation of CA's assault weapons law [PC 30600(a)] for importing and possessing an assault weapon.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 10:43 PM
Both are right. You have not dug deep enough. An 01FFL can do a SSE with DROP IN parts. In your case, there is no DROP IN mag lock so, an 07 will need to MANUFACTURE something and install it and, thereby adding value to it before it comes into California and before the transfer to you is completed.

Bunkum. First, I (or anyone other than that specific FFL) could make the part. I also don't know for certain that making such a mag-blocker (it could be a simple as drilling a hole through the stock and installing a bolt) would require an Type 7 FFL if they can indeed do things like install "DROP IN" parts -- not to mention machine work like cutting barrels, cutting dovetails, re-crowning barrels, etc. etc. etc.

You brought up a NEW variable this time around. Does it need to be done before it ships to CA? That might well be the case but you didn't mention it the first time through nor did anyone else. Given the fact there are FFL's that convert AWs into legal weapons here in CA I suspect that might not be the case but I don't know for sure.

Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW. Again, I would talk to your local FFL and see what permits they have, what their knowledge of the law is and their comfort level. But, it would be a FELONY to remove the blocking plate AT your FFL unless the mag lock was already in place. Can you do it that way? I don't know. If you can't, you will need the mag lock installed out of state and a sled installed instead of a blocking plate.

What are you even saying? Let me parse this sentence: "Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW."

What does that have to do with my posting? Are you responding to my question about the legality of removing the magazine blocking plate when I physically have the firearm outside of CA? Otherwise I never mentioned removing the blocking plate. I mentioned installing one after removing the magazine prior to DROS.

Again, there are NO "DROP IN" parts available. The FFL will HAVE TO MANUFACTURE a mag lock BEFORE the transfer to you is completed. IT will require DESIGNING, FABRICATING and INSTALLING one of parts. ATF has given their opinion many times that adding value PRIOR to transfer is something for 07 FFLS to do, not 01FFLs.

Your "drop-in" argument has already failed. Anyone could make the part. There is no requirement that it be a stock item available to everyone. You also fail on the "added value" argument. "dropping-in" a commercially purchased part is not different than "dropping-in" a part that the owner made/brought-in to be installed.

Finally, I'm not trying to spin anything. I just don't think one of us is grasping everything involved in doing this SSE. I'm not sure which one of us that is. It could easily be me. I'm definately unsure exactly how this blocking plate is installed or exactly how it functions. Personally, I'd feel much more comfortable with a mag lock and sled. That way, I could easily convert it to use 10 round (or less) magazines. However, it is also obvious that you don't completely understand SSEs since, you stated that "I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain." Which, now you know is obviously wrong.

I recognized my misunderstanding in my earlier posting -- I'm glad someone brought it to my attention and it wasn't you. So far you have failed to recognize the fallacious comments you have made.

I will suggest that you go back to the thread that you just quoted about no longer needing an 07 FFL and reread the entire thread and the thread it links to. You will find that there is still a need for an 07FFL when it comes to SSEs like the one you are proposing.

Maybe you could post the comments for me? I seem to have missed them the first time I read them -- along with the adding value part, the special exemption for commercially available "drop-in" parts, the manufacture part, etc.

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 10:50 PM
In order to legally recieve an imported assault weapon, the CA FFL dealer must have a valid assault weapons permit.

Unless the recieving CA FFL dealer has a valid assault weapons permit, the "assault weapon" needs to be made CA legal prior to importation.

Otherwise, the CA FFL dealer is in violation of CA's assault weapons law [PC 30600(a)] for importing and possessing an assault weapon.

OK, that makes sense, thanks -- and I apologize for not catching it on "bigcalidave's" response. Sounds like I need to have the blocking plate installed before it ships to CA or find an FFL with the appropriate AW permit and not because the magazine blocker was not commercially available as a "drop-in" part.

ojisan
02-10-2012, 11:16 PM
Not sure on the need for the blocking plate.
A sled in the well, locked in with the magazine lock, should be fine.
A block of woood would work, also a mag filled with epoxy.
Another FFL I spoke with wants the mag catch removed completely...he does not care about a mag catch lock, no magazine at all.
No mag = single shot.
Unless the CA dealer is a AW Dealer and can legally accept the gun and convert it to CA compliant, the gun must enter the state as a single shot.
There used to be a couple out of CA dealers who would do this, I've lost track of them.

CSACANNONEER
02-10-2012, 11:26 PM
Bunkum. First, I (or anyone other than that specific FFL) could make the part. I also don't know for certain that making something to block the installation of a magazine (it could be as simple as cross-drilling a hole through the stock and installing a bolt) would require an Type 7 FFL if they can indeed do things like install "DROP IN" parts -- not to mention machine work like cutting barrels, cutting dovetails, re-crowning barrels, etc. etc. etc.


No, both are correct. Link will follow showing that "drop in parts" is though to be an exception to needing an 07 by some well respected members.

01FFLs do not do "machine work like cutting barrels, cutting dovetails, re-crowning barrels, etc. etc. etc." on guns in their inventory. They need an 07 to do that. Or, did ATF recently decide that there is no reason to have an 07 anymore?



You brought up a NEW variable this time around. Does it need to be done before it ships to CA? That might well be the case but you didn't mention it the first time through nor did anyone else. Given the fact there are FFL's that convert AWs into legal weapons here in CA I suspect that might not be the case but I don't know for sure.

Yep, I thought you knew a few things so, I tried to be brief and not include every variable in my posts. I see now, I was wrong to do so.

Another variable you will have to contend with is trying to find an AW dealer who is willing to do SSEs. Good luck with that one. Also, AW dealers temd to charge more than using an OOS FFL.


What are you even saying? Let me parse this sentence: "Uh, I'm not implying anything except, ANYWHERE that the blocking plate is removed, the gun needs to have a magazine lock already installed or, you will be manufacturing and AW."

What does that have to do with my posting? Are you responding to my question about the legality of removing the magazine blocking plate when I physically have the firearm outside of CA? Otherwise I never mentioned removing the blocking plate. I mentioned installing one after removing the magazine.
Look at your comment about doing installing mag locks at a FFL's shop. Guess what, if the FFL's shop is in CA, you would be committimng a felony if you installed a mag lock after removing your plate. Ao, I was implying that you can not manufacture an AW anywhere in CA, including in a gun shop.



Your "drop-in" argument has already failed. Anyone could make the part. There is no requirement that it be a stock item available to everyone. You also fail on the "added value" argument. "Dropping-in" a commercially purchased part is not different than "dropping-in" a part that the owner made/brought-in to be installed. Both add the same amount of value too.

Niether arguement is mine. THe "adding value" happens to come from ATF. The "drop in" one comea from BWeiss. Sorry about that.



I recognized my misunderstanding in my earlier posting -- I'm glad someone brought it to my attention and it wasn't you. So far you have failed to recognize the fallacious comments you have made.



Yep, you have filed to see many errors you have made in this thread. I have tried to help you to understand some of them but, I guess I am having a hard time making my thoughts clear to you.



Maybe you could post the comments for me? I seem to have missed them the first time I read them -- along with the adding value part, the manufacture part, the exemption of commercially available "drop-in" parts, etc. This is exactly the sort of bunkum that gets flung around so many gun shops. Ask an honest questions and receive bunkum (often with a large dose of scorn) in return.

I would suggest not insulting those who are trying to help you. Here is a the link (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=441766) I found in the the thread that you linked to. As you can see BWiess clearly makes an exception for "drop in parts". Your "bunkum" attitude is clearly something that you will have to overcome when asking people for help in the future. BTW, the "added value" arguement can be found on this forum too. I'm not going to do all your homework for you.:p But, ask yourself why 07s exist if 01s can do everything anyways.

CSACANNONEER
02-10-2012, 11:29 PM
Not sure on the need for the blocking plate.
A sled in the well, locked in with the magazine lock, should be fine.
A block of woood would work, also a mag filled with epoxy.
Another FFL I spoke with wants the mag catch removed completely...he does not care about a mag catch lock, no magazine at all.
No mag = single shot.
Unless the CA dealer is a AW Dealer and can legally accept the gun and convert it to CA compliant, the gun must enter the state as a single shot.
There used to be a couple out of CA dealers who would do this, I've lost track of them.

:facepalm:If the magwell is open and a mag could be held in place............:eek:

Excelsior
02-10-2012, 11:49 PM
Not sure on the need for the blocking plate.
A sled in the well, locked in with the magazine lock, should be fine.
A block of woood would work, also a mag filled with epoxy.
Another FFL I spoke with wants the mag catch removed completely...he does not care about a mag catch lock, no magazine at all.
No mag = single shot.
Unless the CA dealer is a AW Dealer and can legally accept the gun and convert it to CA compliant, the gun must enter the state as a single shot.
There used to be a couple out of CA dealers who would do this, I've lost track of them.

Removing the mag catch along with the mag is an excellent idea.

Wouldn't a "sled" have to be retained in a way that it would take a tool to remove it (given a mag can still be retained) or would the standard mag catch be sufficient?

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 12:00 AM
Removing the mag catch along with the mag is an excellent idea.

Wouldn't a "sled" have to be retained in a way that it would take a tool to remove it (given a mag can still be retained) or would the standard mag catch be sufficient?

Removing the mag catch and leaving an open mag well is not a good option. The gun is still capable of accepting detachable magazines and thus, it is an
AW!

You stated that you have done a lot of research about SSEs already. Commonly SSEs are done with sleds held in place by some sort of mag lock. A STANDARD MAG CATCH IS NOT SUFFICIENT.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:07 AM
Removing the mag catch and leaving an open mag well is not a good option. The gun is still capable of accepting detachable magazines and thus, it is an
AW!

You stated that you have done a lot of research about SSEs already. Commonly SSEs are done with sleds held in place by some sort of mag lock. A STANDARD MAG CATCH IS NOT SUFFICIENT.

I have done a lot of research, hence my question. In any event I wish you would refrain from commenting on this thread.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 12:20 AM
Why? Am I giving bad advise or are you just not understanding the simple concepts that I'm trying to help you with? The latest one is that an open magwell, without a mag catch, will still accept detachable magazines. Even if the mags have to be held in place to function and functioning is not reliable, it would be considered a felony AW since, you do not need a tool to detach the magazine. I hope this keeps you from thinking that removing the mag catch in really a good idea.

If you had done a lot of research about SSEs, you'ld already understand how sleds need to be installed. YOu can find a lot of information about this in the gunsmithing forum since, when we build off roster guns, we still have to make them exempt from the roster at first. This normally means the use of a locked in sled.

morrcarr67
02-11-2012, 7:32 AM
Excelsior - You need to reed this thread:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=441766

It was started by Bill Wiese who is one of our legal eagles with the Calguns Foundation. Be sure to read the WHOLE thread as there are many questions asked in that thread that are talked about in this thread.

The thread you linked to was started by Cyc Wid It. A member here who was one of the very first people to do the SSE with the help of people like Bill and some willing dealers. It is a very good thread with a lot of good information.

Once you read that thread you will see that what CSACANNONEER has been saying is right on the money. All the advise he has given you will keep you and the dealer you work with out of trouble.

I will try to sum it up for you:


In it's native form this handgun is an AW
A CA 01 OR 07 FFL will need a AW permit to have it shipped to them in it's native form
Only 07 FFL's may "manufacture" parts and do "machine" work to make this handgun CA compliant (this is for a CA FFL, I'm not sure about out of state FFL's but I would think it holds true for them too)
To be registered to you it must be a single shot dimentionlly compliant pistol
Once registered you may use a 10 round magazine with a magazine lock


I hope you go away feeling like you got the answers you needed to be able to get the gun you want.

If you still have questions after reading Bill's thread and going over this thread again please feel free to ask what ever else you need answers to. Someone will be along to give you an answer that will keep you out of trouble.

Jesse

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 7:42 AM
I have done a lot of research, hence my question. In any event I wish you would refrain from commenting on this thread.

Your attitude stinks, btw... Learn to deal with the people that provide great advice here every day without the anger. The answer was given a long time ago, everything else was you being stubborn.

CCrawford
02-11-2012, 10:14 AM
Most SSE guns are not an AW by definition, the Ruger Charger is. That means the game must be played by a defferent set of rules in the beginning. Cyc Wid It excellent post assumes the pistol is not a AW.
I believe the challenge the OP is having is he does not understand which order the laws need to be applied (the hierarchy of the laws involved). First - Federal law regarding manufacturing a weapon – making and installing the bullet button (there is no standard off the shelf part that I am aware of), so no drop in exemption.
Then California AW weapon importation laws apply – Either the weapon cannot be an AW, or it must go through a Cal AW dealer. It would be much easier to get the 10/22 bullet button made in my opinion.
Only after the above is done can you get to the SSE modifications – which would not be much – epoxy filled mag, since a charger would already be dimensionally compliant.
It sounds like the OP wants to do the SSE stuff first and does not understand the first two steps.
I have read that the company that makes the 10/22 Thompson 1927 dress up kits makes 10/22 bullet buttons on a special order basic.

12voltguy
02-11-2012, 10:31 AM
Your attitude stinks, btw... Learn to deal with the people that provide great advice here every day without the anger. The answer was given a long time ago, everything else was you being stubborn.

yup
I would say easy way is build an 80%
much more fun too:)
That is how I do AR15 pistols & will make my own charger, my own sled & my own BB
NO PAPERWORK NEEDED;)

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 10:40 AM
Most SSE guns are not an AW by definition, the Ruger Charger is. That means the game must be played by a defferent set of rules in the beginning. Cyc Wid It excellent post assumes the pistol is not a AW.
I believe the challenge the OP is having is he does not understand which order the laws need to be applied (the hierarchy of the laws involved). First - Federal law regarding manufacturing a weapon – making and installing the bullet button (there is no standard off the shelf part that I am aware of), so no drop in exemption.
Then California AW weapon importation laws apply – Either the weapon cannot be an AW, or it must go through a Cal AW dealer. It would be much easier to get the 10/22 bullet button made in my opinion.
Only after the above is done can you get to the SSE modifications – which would not be much – epoxy filled mag, since a charger would already be dimensionally compliant.
It sounds like the OP wants to do the SSE stuff first and does not understand the first two steps.
I have read that the company that makes the 10/22 Thompson 1927 dress up kits makes 10/22 bullet buttons on a special order basic.

Good post. I will disagree with the thought that most SSEs are not also AWs. While it may be heading that way, there have been a hell of a lot of AR, AK, MAC and other "AW" type weapons which have come into California under SSEs. In the beginning of SSEs, it was primarily AW type weapons.

Also, the company you are refering to is out of 10-22 magazine locks (not "Bullet Buttons" since that is a registered trade mark owned by another member) and does not have plans of making anymore. I know this and that is why I said that one would have to be fabricated and there are no "drop in" parts available.

ojisan
02-11-2012, 11:23 AM
Removing the mag catch and leaving an open mag well is not a good option. The gun is still capable of accepting detachable magazines and thus, it is an
AW!

You stated that you have done a lot of research about SSEs already. Commonly SSEs are done with sleds held in place by some sort of mag lock. A STANDARD MAG CATCH IS NOT SUFFICIENT.

Just so you know...the FFL that I spoke with does all SSE by removing the mag catch...1911s and others included....and this is how he would want to do a Charger.
I questioned him on this...he says he was in court on this and got a favorable ruling so he does all his SSEs this way.
He even discussed DOJ checking on his SSEs on 10 day hold and giving him the OK for this way on several occasions.
I'm not saying he is right or wrong...but if this is the way he is comfortable doing it, and he does it this way often, then to use him this is how it would be done.

I've been stuck at home for the last year...as soon as I can get out and about again I will go visit him with a Charger and see what we can get going.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 11:32 AM
Just so you know...the FFL that I spoke with does all SSE by removing the mag catch...1911s and others included....and this is how he would want to do a Charger.
I questioned him on this...he says he was in court on this and got a favorable ruling so he does all his SSEs this way.
He even discussed DOJ checking on his SSEs on 10 day hold and giving him the OK for this way on several occasions.
I'm not saying he is right or wrong...but if this is the way he is comfortable doing it, and he does it this way often, then to use him this is how it would be done.

I've been stuck at home for the last year...as soon as I can get out and about again I will go visit him with a Charger and see what we can get going.

WOW. I remember a few people here thinking it would be OK to not have a mag catch in an OLL. But, those with a little more knowledge quickly pointed out that no mag catch and open magwell will still allow the gun to accept detachable magazines. Thus, it would be an illegal AW. It would not make a difference if the gun could feed reliably or not when holding a mag in place. The bottom line is if it could possibly feed (and it could) it would be illegal. Unless something has changed regarding this philosophy, I would not be comfortable working with a FFL who thought like that. Of course, I could be wrong since "he was in court" and got a favorable ruling. He should be able to cite the case so that we all can learn from it.

tonelar
02-11-2012, 11:44 AM
I bet that ffl (ojisan writes about) removes the mag catches AND still locks in his sleds (like i've seen some SSE 1911s with an over-long grip screw).

Just my take on this.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 11:49 AM
I bet that ffl (ojisan writes about) removes the mag catches AND still locks in his sleds (like i've seen some SSE 1911s with an over-long grip screw).

Just my take on this.

That would make sense. I got a MAC done that way. However, when it comes to a charger, how could one instal the mag catch and mag lock without creating an AW for a moment? It just does not sound like the best idea to me.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:29 PM
Your attitude stinks, btw... Learn to deal with the people that provide great advice here every day without the anger. The answer was given a long time ago, everything else was you being stubborn.

I don't mind being told that I misunderstood the distinction been the Charger being off the roster and it being recognized as an AW with regard to bringing it into CA or that it can be used with a 10 round mag and a bullet button-type device once it's been DROSed as a single shot. I believe I said so and thanked those that pointed that out.

What I detest is the gun shop FUD about "adding value", "manufacture" and the like in the context of what I was talking about. The condescending and almighty-right tone of some experts is a huge turn-off. In other worsds it "stinks."

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:31 PM
Just so you know...the FFL that I spoke with does all SSE by removing the mag catch...1911s and others included....and this is how he would want to do a Charger.
I questioned him on this...he says he was in court on this and got a favorable ruling so he does all his SSEs this way.
He even discussed DOJ checking on his SSEs on 10 day hold and giving him the OK for this way on several occasions.
I'm not saying he is right or wrong...but if this is the way he is comfortable doing it, and he does it this way often, then to use him this is how it would be done.

I've been stuck at home for the last year...as soon as I can get out and about again I will go visit him with a Charger and see what we can get going.
Please keep us posted.

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 12:35 PM
I would just install a drill bit or other metal dowel (or wood?) between the mag front hole and the mag release, then install the mag lock. Nothing getting in there with that in the way. That's how I'm building my 80% charger.

Ojisan, see I told you there has to be SOME interest in these!

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:36 PM
Excelsior - You need to reed this thread:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=441766

It was started by Bill Wiese who is one of our legal eagles with the Calguns Foundation. Be sure to read the WHOLE thread as there are many questions asked in that thread that are talked about in this thread.

The thread you linked to was started by Cyc Wid It. A member here who was one of the very first people to do the SSE with the help of people like Bill and some willing dealers. It is a very good thread with a lot of good information.

Once you read that thread you will see that what CSACANNONEER has been saying is right on the money. All the advise he has given you will keep you and the dealer you work with out of trouble.

I will try to sum it up for you:


In it's native form this handgun is an AW
A CA 01 OR 07 FFL will need a AW permit to have it shipped to them in it's native form
Only 07 FFL's may "manufacture" parts and do "machine" work to make this handgun CA compliant (this is for a CA FFL, I'm not sure about out of state FFL's but I would think it holds true for them too)
To be registered to you it must be a single shot dimentionlly compliant pistol
Once registered you may use a 10 round magazine with a magazine lock


I hope you go away feeling like you got the answers you needed to be able to get the gun you want.

If you still have questions after reading Bill's thread and going over this thread again please feel free to ask what ever else you need answers to. Someone will be along to give you an answer that will keep you out of trouble.

Jesse

Thanks.

ojisan
02-11-2012, 12:42 PM
Ojisan, see I told you there has to be SOME interest in these!

Funny how this topic came up again so quickly....it's a trap!
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/images/smilies/eek.gif


http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/images/smilies/wink.gif

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 12:43 PM
I have done a lot of research, hence my question. In any event I wish you would refrain from commenting on this thread.

I don't mind being told that I misunderstood the distinction been the Charger being off the roster and it being recognized as an AW with regard to bringing it into CA or that it can be used with a 10 round mag and a bullet button-type device once it's been DROSed as a single shot. I believe I said so and thanked those that pointed that out.

What I detest is the gun shop FUD about "adding value", "manufacture" and the like in the context of what I was talking about. The condescending and almighty-right tone of some experts is a huge turn-off. In other worsds it "stinks."

That's the line I'm most referring to, but in general you have been pretty hostile to people trying to help. I read the comments over and I'm just not seeing the "condescending tone" you claim.

morrcarr67
02-11-2012, 12:44 PM
Excelsior - There is no FUD about the manufacturing or machining information given in this thread.

Did you read the thread I posted that waz started by Bill?

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:47 PM
That's the line I'm most referring to, but in general you have been pretty hostile to people trying to help. I read the comments over and I'm just not seeing the "condescending tone" you claim.

Take your selective view glasses off...

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 12:49 PM
Excelsior - There is no FUD about the manufacturing or machining information given in this thread.

Did you read the thread I posted that waz started by Bill?

If you read my example that I asked questions about I said that I would install a plate to block the magazine well. I never said anything about having the gunsmith "manufacture" the plate.

morrcarr67
02-11-2012, 12:53 PM
Excelsior - you are correct on your first post. But you later said that you had researched this and that it was ok for a 01 ffl to do this and that is incorrect as explained in Bill's thread.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 12:53 PM
Thanks.

You are welcome. Thats the same thread I linked to. As you can plainly see, the FUD you are refering to is either explained in that thread or has been recently released in ATF opinion letters. How hard is it for you to understand that?

ojisan
02-11-2012, 1:02 PM
That would make sense. I got a MAC done that way. However, when it comes to a charger, how could one instal the mag catch and mag lock without creating an AW for a moment? It just does not sound like the best idea to me.

The mag catch does not function until the lock is installed...just like installing a BB.

We either need a 7FFL like PRK or get these converted to CA-compliant out of state first.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 1:41 PM
Excelsior - you are correct on your first post. But you later said that you had researched this and that it was ok for a 01 ffl to do this and that is incorrect as explained in Bill's thread.

What's your point? We've covered this. Just feel the need to keep harping away? Had you been the first to replay I would have gotten all the information/clarification I needed in a very gentlemanly manner. That would have been it. Instead I was treated to crap about designing and manufacturing the very plate that I said I would install myself in my example. I even mentioned that I might prepare another stock to facilitate the 2 minute changeover.

It's moot though as the weapon can't be received (not worked on but received) into CA by a Type 1 FFL making my example unworkable -- but NOT because the FFL had to "manufacture" something that was not commercially available.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 1:54 PM
I also question something else that was said. Let's say a Ruger Charger had a "bullet button" installed in another state rendering it a non-AW by CA law prior to being shipped to a Type 1 FFL in CA.

Let's say the customer then arrived with a "blocking plate" and handed it over to the Type 1 FFL to use in the conversion of the Charger to a single shot variety. If the bullet button was momentarily removed (in theory making the Charger an AW) to install the backing plate speaking for myself, I don't think the intent of the law is being broken although I am no expert, only stating my personal belief to be applied only to my personal actions. If my FFL was comfortable with it, I would be too -- even in a court of law.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 2:00 PM
I also question something else that was said. Let's say a Ruger Charger had a "bullet button" installed in another state rendering it a non-AW by CA law prior to being shipped to a Type 1 FFL in CA.

Let's say the customer then arrived with a "blocking plate" and handed it over to the Type 1 FFL to use in the conversion of the Charger to a single shot variety. If the bullet button was momentarily removed (in theory making the Charger an AW) to install the backing plate speaking for myself, I don't think the intent of the law is being broken although I am no expert, only stating my personal belief to be applied only to my personal actions. If my FFL was comfortable with it, I would be too -- even in a court of law.

This is dangerous thinking. Who cares if your not violating the intent of the law? You would clearly be violating the letter of the law and that's what matters, that's what courts decide based upon. You'd be comfortable in court knowing that you had involvement in manufacturing an assault weapon? You'd be comfortable exposing the FFL to that kind of liability?

ETA: Things like the AW Flowchart, and SSE have been created specifically to follow the letter of the law. They have been vetted by people who know this stuff.

morrcarr67
02-11-2012, 2:04 PM
You might be correct. I personally wouldn't tempt it though. There are a more then one way to make it zero rounds.

Why not buy a 10 round magazine and block it to 0. Send this magazine to your FFL that is out of state and willing to install the mag lock. If the OOS FFL does this it is already a single shot compliant pistol. All the local ffl has to do is DROS it. You take it home after your 10 day wait. Now all you have to do is put in a new 10 round magazine and you're GTG.

ojisan
02-11-2012, 2:07 PM
Once we have changed the out-of-state Charger from being an AW to a handgun by using a mag lock, we next need to comply with the CA Safe Handgun Roster rules to import it into CA.
Since the Charger is not on the Roster, it can only be brought in as a single shot.
So...usually a "sled" (a mag with zero-round capacity or even a block of wood or plastic) is installed in the mag well along with the mag lock.
I'm not sure what the blocking plate is that you describe...perhaps it is the same concept as a "sled".

Cookbook recipe: The Charger needs both a mag lock and a sled installed before it can enter CA (or these can be installed in CA by a 07FFL).
At the time of delivery to you, the Charger must have the mag lock and sled installed.
Once you have it home, you can replace the sled with a 10 round maximum-capacity mag.

ETA: sorry Moorcarr, I type to slow...redundant post after yours.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 2:35 PM
This is dangerous thinking. Who cares if your not violating the intent of the law? You would clearly be violating the letter of the law and that's what matters, that's what courts decide based upon. You'd be comfortable in court knowing that you had involvement in manufacturing an assault weapon? You'd be comfortable exposing the FFL to that kind of liability?

ETA: Things like the AW Flowchart, and SSE have been created specifically to follow the letter of the law. They have been vetted by people who know this stuff.
I'm not advocating anyone accept or follow what I personally believe. There is often a huge difference between the letter and intent of the law.

The FFL would make their own choice. They are the experts, not me.

What I detest is undue stress caused by comments like "You would clearly be violating the letter of the law and that's what matters, that's what courts decide based upon." Not only is that untrue it causes undue anxiety. Diligence is important. Making people unduly afraid is not. It gets to the point where people feel they cannot strip-down their Chargers for a full cleaning and/or parts replacement because that might mean that the bullet button is momentarily removed and in the process be "manufacturing an assault weapon" in some peoples' minds.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 2:43 PM
I'm not advocating anyone accept or follow what I personally believe. There is often a huge difference between the letter and intent of the law.

The FFL would make their own choice. They are the experts, not me.

What I detest is undue stress caused by comments like "You would clearly be violating the letter of the law and that's what matters, that's what courts decide based upon." Not only is that untrue it causes undue anxiety. It gets to the point where people feel they cannot strip-down their Chargers for a full cleaning and/or parts replacement because that might mean that the bullet button is momentarily removed and in the process be "manufacturing an assault weapon" in some peoples' minds.

design the mag-lock (quit calling it a Bullet Button. It isn't one) so that you can disasemble the firearm with the maglock still attached and you should be fine.

What you suggest would be like me going out into the garage with a hacksaw to a Saiga-12 and cutting the barrel down to 16" and then welding on a new 2+" muzzle brake for it. If I do that, I created an illegal SBS for the few minutes that the barrel was at 16" and until I welded the new brake on. Just because my intent is to have a shotgun with an 18" barrel when I am done doesn't mean that I don't have a felony on my hands until the brake is welded on.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 2:45 PM
I'm not advocating anyone accept or follow what I personally believe. There is often a huge difference between the letter and intent of the law.

The FFL would make their own choice. They are the experts, not me.

What I detest is undue stress caused by comments like "You would clearly be violating the letter of the law and that's what matters, that's what courts decide based upon." Not only is that untrue it causes undue anxiety. It gets to the point where people feel they cannot strip-down their Chargers for a full cleaning and/or parts replacement because that might mean that the bullet button is momentarily removed and in the process be "manufacturing an assault weapon" in some peoples' minds.

You did acknowledge that you understand that would be creating an AW. So are you saying its ok to manufacture an AW if its "just for a little bit?" Ultimately it seems like you're saying its ok to break the law when you feel like it and its not for to long. That seems like pretty shaky reasoning.

If the intent of the law really mattered as much as you seem to think it does we wouldn't have OLL's or SSE's at all. Those are completely contrary to what the legislature was trying to do when enacting the AW bans and roster. In reality its the letter of the law that matters and thats why the SSE process has been devised specifically to follow the letter of the law. All the while we thumb our noses at the intent of the law.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 2:46 PM
You might be correct. I personally wouldn't tempt it though. There are a more then one way to make it zero rounds.

Why not buy a 10 round magazine and block it to 0. Send this magazine to your FFL that is out of state and willing to install the mag lock. If the OOS FFL does this it is already a single shot compliant pistol. All the local ffl has to do is DROS it. You take it home after your 10 day wait. Now all you have to do is put in a new 10 round magazine and you're GTG.

Yes, that sounds most prudent. I think I will have a friend of mine in CO buy one at the local Wally World. I am going to send him a stock with the magazine well blocked. He can swap the stocks and take the Charger to his FFL for shipment to mine. He can mail me the original stock and magazine separately.

Are CA FFL's fairly open to DROSing handguns that have been converted to fall within the single fire exemption?

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 2:47 PM
You did acknowledge that you understand that would be creating an AW. So are you saying its ok to manufacture an AW if its "just for a little bit?" Ultimately it seems like you're saying its ok to break the law when you feel like it and its not for to long. That seems like pretty shaky reasoning.

If the intent of the law really mattered as much as you seem to think it does we wouldn't have OLL's or SSE's at all. Those are completely contrary to what the legislature was trying to do when enacting the AW bans and roster. In reality its the letter of the law that matters and thats why the SSE process has been devised specifically to follow the letter of the law. All the while we thumb our noses at the intent of the law.

No I did not. I quoted you to show the absurdity of your words. Keep bloviating. I'm done with this discussion.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 2:51 PM
Yes, that sounds most prudent. I think I will have a friend of mine in CO buy one at the local Wally World. I am going to send him a stock with the magazine well blocked. He can swap the stocks and take the Charger to his FFL for shipment to mine. He can mail me the original stock and magazine separately.

OK, assuming that your CO friend is not an FFL, then what you said above has the potential of having your friend commit a federal felony. Don't have a non-licensee buy a firearm that he intends to sell to you (or have your pre-pay for). By doing so, he would be lying on the 4473, a federal felony.


Are CA FFL's fairly open to DROSing handguns that have been converted to fall within the single fire exemption?some are, many aren't.

tonelar
02-11-2012, 2:57 PM
design the mag-lock (quit calling it a Bullet Button. It isn't one) so that you can disasemble the firearm with the maglock still attached and you should be fine.

What you suggest would be like me going out into the garage with a hacksaw to a Saiga-12 and cutting the barrel down to 16" and then welding on a new 2+" muzzle brake for it. If I do that, I created an illegal SBS for the few minutes that the barrel was at 16" and until I welded the new brake on. Just because my intent is to have a shotgun with an 18" barrel when I am done doesn't mean that I don't have a felony on my hands until the brake is welded on.

Fixed it for you, Ke6guy.

Excelsior,
When people remove a magazine lock from a weapon, they first insure that while it's off; they are not in possesion of an AW. They do this by;
a) dissassembling the weapon so it cannot function
b) removing all evil features from the weapon (rendering it featureless)
or
c) replacing the bolt, barrel etc of a semi auto long gun with rimfire components

Your choices are a or b with a pistol RAW and I couldn't see accomplishing b readily since the "magazine outside of the pistol grip" is such a major part of the Charger's design.


As far as your reaction to a lot of the posters to your thread; understand that not one of us like the CA AWB in the least. Many don't like it so much that they've taken legal action against it. More have actually gone out of their way to find ways to legally attain weaponry that otherwise would he unavailable to us here.

None of us want to see a fellow shooter get frustrated by the AWB or any other foolishness in our state laws. Just so you know why so many have tried to point you in the right direction today.

Good luck. Hope you get a way nice (and legal) Ruger Charger.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 2:57 PM
If the bullet button was momentarily removed (in theory making the Charger an AW)

Forgive me, that looks a lot like you acknowledging that you'd be creating an AW.

No I did not. I quoted you to show the absurdity of your words. Keep bloviating. I'm done with this discussion.

I see the quote, I'm missing the absurdity.

Anyone who presents facts to you that are contrary to your misunderstanding of the law seems to be faced with your backlash. You realize we're trying to help you right?

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 2:59 PM
Fixed it for you..thanks. I'll fix my post.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 3:09 PM
design the mag-lock (quit calling it a Bullet Button. It isn't one) so that you can disasemble the firearm with the maglock still attached and you should be fine.

What you suggest would be like me going out into the garage with a hacksaw to a Saiga-12 and cutting the barrel down to 16" and then welding on a new 2+" muzzle brake for it. If I do that, I created an illegal SBS for the few minutes that the barrel was at 16" and until I welded the new brake on. Just because my intent is to have a shotgun with an 18" barrel when I am done doesn't mean that I have a felony on my hands until the brake is welded on.

Yes but would that keep you from doing the work yourself if you wanted such a configuration? Or would you trust yourself to keep your garage door closed until you had the brake securely welded to the barrel? There is a HUGE difference in intent between cutting the barrel and welding on the brake when one gets around to it (after taking part in a few public 3-gun competitions let's say) and immediately welding the brake in place after cutting the barrel in a private, secured setting.

I wouldn't want to get arrested for shooting a too-short shotgun at the local range. I would mind much less if somehow (start fantasy now) law enforcement broke into my garage and arrested me just as I was beginning to tack the brake into place after having cut the barrel a few minuted earlier.

Further I have NEVER heard of a situation where (for example) law enforcement confirmed that a given Saiga had originally been sold with an 18" barrel yet were later investigating why the shotgun (still legal) had a 16" barrel plus the brake, demanding proof that the modifications to the shotgun had been done by a correctly licensed individual. Not ever.

While I might possibly remove the barrel from the rest of the firearm to work on it, it would be so that I could clamp the barrel into my cold saw and not to avoid "manufacturing an AW" for a few minutes.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 3:13 PM
Yes but would that keep you from doing the work yourself if you wanted such a configuration? Or would you trust yourself to keep your garage door closed until you had the brake securely welded to the barrel? There is a HUGE difference in intent between cutting the barrel and welding on the brake when one gets around to it (after taking part in a few public 3-gun competitions let's say) and immediately welding the brake in place after cutting the barrel in a private, secured setting.

I wouldn't want to get arrested for shooting a too-short shotgun at the local range. I would mind much less if somehow (start fantasy now) law enforcement broke into my garage and arrested me just as I was beginning to tack the brake into place after having cut the barrel a few minuted earlier.

Further I have NEVER heard of a situation where (for example) law enforcement confirmed that a given Saiga had originally been sold with an 18" barrel yet were later investigating why the shotgun (still legal) had a 16" barrel plus the brake, demanding proof that the modifications to the shotgun had been done by a correctly licensed individual. Not ever.

I supposed you'd also think its legal to drive around with a dead hooker in your trunk as long as your taillights are working properly.

A low likelihood of being caught doesn't change the fact that one is breaking the law.

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 3:22 PM
OK, assuming that your CO friend is not an FFL, then what you said above has the potential of having your friend commit a federal felony. Don't have a non-licensee buy a firearm that he intends to sell to you (or have your pre-pay for). By doing so, he would be lying on the 4473, a federal felony.

Et tu, Ke6guj?

The friend makes the purchase, then sells it legally, there is no straw purchase, there is no felony. Buying it for someone else means buying it, then giving it to someone else without the legal transfer. Otherwise he is just selling a gun as normal.

From dontlie.org "A straw purchase is an illegal firearm purchase where the actual buyer of the gun, being unable to pass the required federal background check or desiring to not have his or her name associated with the transaction, uses a proxy buyer who can pass the required background check to purchase the firearm for him/her. It is highly illegal and punishable by a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison."

I know you like to point to the one instance of the FBI agent, as you did in the other thread on this topic, but people should read the details on that case here http://www.shipleylegalfund.com/guilty.php

and know that it is being appealed. The way he was harassed could happen to anyone who has sold a few guns. It does not change the definition of a straw purchase in any way.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 3:23 PM
I supposed you'd also think its legal to drive around with a dead hooker in your trunk as long as your taillights are working properly.

A low likelihood of being caught doesn't change the fact that one is breaking the law.exactly. Just like when you build a pistol from scratch or from an 80% lower, you have to initially build it up in a roster-exempt configuration. Once you have done so, you can modify into another CA-legal configuraiton, even though you can't initially build it that way.

Now, does that mean that every single homebuilt pistol has transitioned through a SSE-configuration on its way to its final configuration? probably not. But just because they dont' know how it was intially built doesn't mean that you can just violat the law and build an off-roster pistol in violation of the law.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 3:30 PM
Et tu, Ke6guj?

The friend makes the purchase, then sells it legally, there is no straw purchase, there is no felony. Buying it for someone else means buying it, then giving it to someone else without the legal transfer. Otherwise he is just selling a gun as normal.

From dontlie.org

I know you like to point to the one instance of the FBI agent, as you did in the other thread on this topic, but people should read the details on that case here http://www.shipleylegalfund.com/guilty.php

and know that it is being appealed. The way he was harassed could happen to anyone who has sold a few guns. It does not change the definition of a straw purchase in any way.
I never used the words "straw purchase" in my post.

ATF is taking the position, and has gotten at least one conviction (it hasn't been overturned yet) that if you buy a firearm with the intent to sell it someone else, that you ahve lied on the 4473.

note that at least one of the guilty charges was him selling the firearm to another LEO (someone who is not a prohibited person at all)

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 3:32 PM
Et tu, Ke6guj?

The friend makes the purchase, then sells it legally, there is no straw purchase, there is no felony. Buying it for someone else means buying it, then giving it to someone else without the legal transfer. Otherwise he is just selling a gun as normal.

From dontlie.org

I know you like to point to the one instance of the FBI agent, as you did in the other thread on this topic, but people should read the details on that case here http://www.shipleylegalfund.com/guilty.php

and know that it is being appealed. The way he was harassed could happen to anyone who has sold a few guns. It does not change the definition of a straw purchase in any way.

There's a lot of disagreement over that. The definition of a straw purchase that you use is really just a common example of how most straw purchases are done but its not all inclusive I don't believe.

In reality, there is no crime called a "straw purchase." Its just a term we use to describe a certain activity. The crime is lying on form 4473. If one purchases a firearm only for the purpose of acting as a proxy and transferring again to someone else are they the "actual purchaser?" Or are they really just acting as an agent for the "actual purchaser?" I'm with Jack on this one. Even if both transfers are done through the proper avenues, the original purchaser still lied on the 4473 by saying he was the actual purchaser when in fact he never intended to be.

ETA: He beat me to it. The point remains the same.

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 3:35 PM
But you are the purchaser, it's black and white. You buy it, then you sell it. These are two separate actions. If you could get in trouble for it, then you could never sell a used gun. Just like any other private property sale, you are allowed to buy stuff then sell it again, if you want to and do it legally.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 3:39 PM
I supposed you'd also think its legal to drive around with a dead hooker in your trunk as long as your taillights are working properly.

A low likelihood of being caught doesn't change the fact that one is breaking the law.

More scare tactics.

I have a Winchester Model 12 that would have an overall length of 25 7/8" if I removed the recoil pad. So obviously I wouldn't do that and go shoot the gun or even keep it in the safe in that condition even broken down.

However to equate a situation like removing and immediately replacing a recoil pad on that shotgun with a new one (of equal or thicker size) to driving around with a dead hooker in my trunk is just nasty and crude ignorance meant to scare people. Very offensive.

No, I wouldn't take the Winchester to a #7 FFL to change out the recoil pad. I'd do it myself, in secured privacy without delay or breaking it down first.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 3:41 PM
But you are the purchaser, it's black and white. You buy it, then you sell it. These are two separate actions. If you could get in trouble for it, then you could never sell a used gun. if you buy it for yourself, use it, then decide to sell it later, that is different from buying something, never using it, and flipping it.



Just like any other private property sale, you are allowed to buy stuff then sell it again, if you want to and do it legally.not everything is that way. You sell one or two firearms after you have used them for a while and no red flags will go up in most cases. Go buy 10 rifles and sell them and you might be considered a dealer that needs to be licensed.

Same goes for cars. Buy and sell a couple cars a year, no problem. Start selling too many cars and CA DMV is going to want you to get your dealer license.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 3:42 PM
OK, assuming that your CO friend is not an FFL, then what you said above has the potential of having your friend commit a federal felony. Don't have a non-licensee buy a firearm that he intends to sell to you (or have your pre-pay for). By doing so, he would be lying on the 4473, a federal felony.


some are, many aren't.

More FUD. He buys the gun. Then he transfers it to me from his FFL to mine. Did you get that part?

Man o man the FUD runnith over!

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 3:43 PM
if you buy it for yourself, use it, then decide to sell it later, that is different from buying something, never using it, and flipping it...



Not when you excuse me, "flip it" via two FFLs. Good grief.

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 3:49 PM
More FUD. He buys the gun. Then he transfers it to me from his FFL to mine. Did you get that part?

Man o man the FUD runnith over!

Not when you excuse me, "flip it" via two FFLs. Good grief.

And you have some law, regulation, or case law that says that a person can buy a firearm with the intent of selling to someone else and it is OK if it goes through an FFL?

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 3:57 PM
And you have some law, regulation, or case law that says that a person can buy a firearm with the intent of selling to someone else and it is OK if it goes through an FFL?

You KNOW there are no laws that give permission. Come on, you're playing games now.

Intent? Are you the thought police? Are they?

They may have corrupt decisions, and they may decide that if you do it a few times you are acting as a seller not an individual, but if a person makes this transaction once or twice then it doesn't violate any laws and there is no reason to expect trouble.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 4:10 PM
The mag catch does not function until the lock is installed...just like installing a BB.

We either need a 7FFL like PRK or get these converted to CA-compliant out of state first.

But, couldn't someone HOLD the mag in and make it function? If so, it's accepting a detachable mag and would be an AW.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 4:26 PM
More scare tactics.

I have a Winchester Model 12 that would have an overall length of 25 7/8" if I removed the recoil pad. So obviously I wouldn't do that and go shoot the gun or even keep it in the safe in that condition even broken down.

However to equate a situation like removing and immediately replacing a recoil pad on that shotgun with a new one (of equal or thicker size) to driving around with a dead hooker in my trunk is just nasty and crude ignorance meant to scare people. Very offensive.

No, I wouldn't take the Winchester to a #7 FFL to change out the recoil pad. I'd do it myself, in secured privacy without delay or breaking it down first.

You would not need to take it to anyone. But, whoever you took it to would need to remove the barrel before removing the recoil pad. That way, while constructive possession could be argued, you would never had had manufactured a SBS. Now an 07FFL with a SOT could do this in some states. California is not one of them though. You seem not to have a good grasp on why an 07 is needed in certain instances and not in others. You have completely ignored the whole thing about a FFL adding value to a firearm BEFORE it is transfered. Also, a new recoil pad would fall under repair or replacement and not adding something new.

Your arguement about the gun only being in an illegal configuration for a few moments is a very bad one. The fact is that if this was done, the law was broken and it doesn't just get reapaired once the gun is in a legal configuration. To think that would be about as dumb as to think that if someone raped your wife, once the rape was over (you know, just a few minutes) the crime would have stopped and no one could get convicted because, there is no ongoing crime. To suggest that anyone commits a felony behind closed doors because, there is little chance of being caught is in bad form and actually against this forums policies.

Buying a firearm with the intent of reselling it (even if no profit is made) requires a FFL. If the one "flipping it" does not have a FFL, he/she is illegally dealing in firearms. If ATF finds out (most people talk too much or write about their illegal activities on computer forums. It does happen. I have been involved in cases very similar), they WILL prosecute! So, do not do it. Obviously, you need to do A LOT more reseach than you ever dreamed you would.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 4:32 PM
You KNOW there are no laws that give permission. Come on, you're playing games now.

Intent? Are you the thought police? Are they?

They may have corrupt decisions, and they may decide that if you do it a few times you are acting as a seller not an individual, but if a person makes this transaction once or twice then it doesn't violate any laws and there is no reason to expect trouble.

There are laws which state that this is illegal activity unless the one "flipping it" has a FFL. If going through FFLs every time the gun is transfered was an exception to the law, the text would clearly state that. It does not. So, it is not legal.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 4:44 PM
You KNOW there are no laws that give permission. Come on, you're playing games now.

Intent? Are you the thought police? Are they?

They may have corrupt decisions, and they may decide that if you do it a few times you are acting as a seller not an individual, but if a person makes this transaction once or twice then it doesn't violate any laws and there is no reason to expect trouble.

Thought police? Where are you getting that from? Intent is an important aspect of many areas of the law, it's established through evidence. If there was a trail of emails for example that would establish intent.

I understand what you're saying here but the ATF disagrees and their interpretation is what matters on federal issues.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 4:58 PM
More scare tactics.

I have a Winchester Model 12 that would have an overall length of 25 7/8" if I removed the recoil pad. So obviously I wouldn't do that and go shoot the gun or even keep it in the safe in that condition even broken down.

However to equate a situation like removing and immediately replacing a recoil pad on that shotgun with a new one (of equal or thicker size) to driving around with a dead hooker in my trunk is just nasty and crude ignorance meant to scare people. Very offensive.

No, I wouldn't take the Winchester to a #7 FFL to change out the recoil pad. I'd do it myself, in secured privacy without delay or breaking it down first.

If you want to commit crimes in the privacy of your own home because you know you won't be arrested, feel free to do so. I don't take issue with that. Just don't try to make it seem as if it's somehow legal because it's at home, it's a short period of time, nobody saw, or whatever other justification you have for it.

It's not wise to say stuff like that when you could potentially mislead an uninformed casual reader of the forum into believing that its legal.

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 5:07 PM
There are laws which state that this is illegal activity unless the one "flipping it" has a FFL. If going through FFLs every time the gun is transfered was an exception to the law, the text would clearly state that. It does not. So, it is not legal.


Which law?

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 5:13 PM
You KNOW there are no laws that give permission. Come on, you're playing games now.

Intent? Are you the thought police? Are they?
this the the part of the 4473 that is in play,

“Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT the actual buyer of the firearm and must answer “no” to question 11a.”

based on the above, Where does it say tht if Mr. Jones uses an FFL to then transfer the firearm that Mr. Smith had Mr Jones purchase for him, that he can answer "yes" to question 11a?



They may have corrupt decisions, and they may decide that if you do it a few times you are acting as a seller not an individual, but if a person makes this transaction once or twice then it doesn't violate any laws and there is no reason to expect trouble.

true, onesy-twosy and noone would probably know about it, or care about it, but just because they dont know about it doesn't make it legal.

I can easily see some of the Sacramento? LEOs picking up "lying on a 4473" charges if is determined that they accepted payment for off-roster handguns that the LEO then went out and purchased so that it could then be PPT transfered to the real buyer that wasn't roster-exempt.

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 5:15 PM
Because he isn't "purchasing it for him" he is purchasing it then selling it to him. Those are distinctly different situations.

12voltguy
02-11-2012, 5:24 PM
Because he isn't "purchasing it for him" he is purchasing it then selling it to him. Those are distinctly different situations.

didn't he say " I will have a friend buy it for me out out of state"....:facepalm:

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 5:26 PM
Because he isn't "purchasing it for him" he is purchasing it then selling it to him. Those are distinctly different situations.

right, and that FBI agent that I mentioned before, was convicted of "Causing a FFL to maintain a false record" for buying a firearm and then reselling it.

I am not saying that this is a common charge, but it is possible and there have been convictions for it. Stating openly on an internet forum that various LEAs have been known to monitor that you are planning on doing something that might pick up a federal felony is not a good idea, so I warned him that there was the potential of a federal felony being committed if he did that.

CSACANNONEER
02-11-2012, 5:27 PM
Because he isn't "purchasing it for him" he is purchasing it then selling it to him. Those are distinctly different situations.

So, he is buying it with the intention of reselling it, right? One needs a FFL for that. Call or write ATF and ask them. An 03FFL will not cut it. One would need an 01 or 07 to be legal.

tonelar
02-11-2012, 6:24 PM
You should just buy your Charger from Table Rock Arms. I bet they'd gladly do the SSE and figure out a way to maglock it for you.

...

I have a Winchester Model 12 that would have an overall length of 25 7/8" if I removed the recoil pad. So obviously I wouldn't do that and go shoot the gun or even keep it in the safe in that condition even broken down.

...

No, I wouldn't take the Winchester to a #7 FFL to change out the recoil pad. I'd do it myself, in secured privacy without delay or breaking it down first.

I gotta ask you. What barrel length is your Model 12? Or does it have a really short length of pull?

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 6:25 PM
So, he is buying it with the intention of reselling it, right? One needs a FFL for that. Call or write ATF and ask them. An 03FFL will not cut it. One would need an 01 or 07 to be legal.

At what distinction? What if you bought a gun at a good price that you know is collectible. You plan on selling it later because its not your thing, but you know a good deal when you see it. Is that against the law? Hell, I don't plan on keeping every gun, so I guess I make a purchase with the intention of reselling it later.... What about the group buy going on, where the buyer is getting crates and crates of something old, selling most of the guns off but keeping a few. Is that different? If someone did this once, how is it anything but infrequent resale?

ke6guj
02-11-2012, 7:34 PM
What about the group buy going on, where the buyer is getting crates and crates of something old, selling most of the guns off but keeping a few. Is that different? If someone did this once, how is it anything but infrequent resale?

my only comment would be that I wouldn't plan on running a "group buy" of 200 "identical" rifles so that I could cherry pick 4-5 of them with my 03FFL, expecially when I was going to be picking them up in person and could cherry pick them on-site.

I know that people have gotten opinions buying stuff like 3-packs shipped to them and picking the best one or two, and selling the rest. But selling off one or two unwanted rifles is a lot different than selling off 195 rifles that I don't want, and had "sold" even before I bought them. I'd want some sort of go ahead from ATF and CADOJ before I did something that big.

Connor P Price
02-11-2012, 8:00 PM
At what distinction? What if you bought a gun at a good price that you know is collectible. You plan on selling it later because its not your thing, but you know a good deal when you see it. Is that against the law? Hell, I don't plan on keeping every gun, so I guess I make a purchase with the intention of reselling it later.... What about the group buy going on, where the buyer is getting crates and crates of something old, selling most of the guns off but keeping a few. Is that different? If someone did this once, how is it anything but infrequent resale?

On the first, I think you're right that you'd be fine. The distinction being that your purchasing for yourself as an investment. The problem with lying on the 4473 comes up when there is already a second purchaser lined up from the beginning. In that situation the second person is the "actual purchaser."

If a second person is already lined up and orchestrated it you essentially have a principal-agent relationship in which the first purchaser is acting as the agent. When an agent makes a purchase on the behalf of a principal the actual purchaser is usually considered the principal.

On the second, I don't know much about 03ffl's. I'm not sure how that all works.

12voltguy
02-11-2012, 9:00 PM
Yes, that sounds most prudent. I think I will have a friend of mine in CO buy one at the local Wally World. I am going to send him a stock with the magazine well blocked. He can swap the stocks and take the Charger to his FFL for shipment to mine. He can mail me the original stock and magazine separately.

Are CA FFL's fairly open to DROSing handguns that have been converted to fall within the single fire exemption?

At what distinction? What if you bought a gun at a good price that you know is collectible. You plan on selling it later because its not your thing, but you know a good deal when you see it. Is that against the law? Hell, I don't plan on keeping every gun, so I guess I make a purchase with the intention of reselling it later.... What about the group buy going on, where the buyer is getting crates and crates of something old, selling most of the guns off but keeping a few. Is that different? If someone did this once, how is it anything but infrequent resale?

;););)

bigcalidave
02-11-2012, 9:14 PM
In that situation the second person is the "actual purchaser."

I still disagree. The first person is the actual purchaser at the time, then sells it.
Whatever, unless this is clearly defined as bad nobody is going to get harassed for doing it once. It's legal on the surface, and ANYTHING could be maliciously prosecuted, like the FBI agent.

It's a little less clear than the family member buying it out of state situation, which people STILL argue about being "a straw purchase" but I wouldn't hesitate personally to ask someone out of state to install a mag lock on a gun before shipping it to my ffl.

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 10:38 PM
didn't he say " I will have a friend buy it for me out out of state"....:facepalm:

Did you miss the part about the gun being transferred between two FFLs? It really makes no difference if I give my friend the money up front and he sells me the rifle (via the FFLs, without more money exchanging hands) before the transfer or he pays for it and I reimburse him the entire sales price before the transfer via the FFLs. All the FFL's want to see is a receipt one way or the other.

This is NOT a matter of someone legally buying a gun and then illegally selling it to me off the books! :facepalm:

Excelsior
02-11-2012, 10:57 PM
If you want to commit crimes in the privacy of your own home because you know you won't be arrested, feel free to do so. I don't take issue with that. Just don't try to make it seem as if it's somehow legal because it's at home, it's a short period of time, nobody saw, or whatever other justification you have for it.

It's not wise to say stuff like that when you could potentially mislead an uninformed casual reader of the forum into believing that its legal.

Just don't try to equate removing and replacing a recoil pad or cutting a barrel and installing a recoil brake with driving around with an excuse me, dead hooker in my trunk. That's highly offensive. It's hyperbole meant to offend and to frighten.

I never said it was legal to cut the barrel and leave it in that condition! Don't for a moment think you can speak for me, particularly with that dead hooker crap! What I DID say was there is an often HUGE difference between the letter and the intent of the law. That's precisely how this would play out in court -- was the gun owner's intent (and their ability to perform) to install a brake without delay in secured privacy, rendering the gun in a legal configuration or was it to create, keep and use a shotgun in an illegal configuration? Huge, huge difference! Things are not as black/white, cut/dried as you would like to suggest.

If you cannot see the DIFFERENCE between diligently cutting a shotgun barrel and immediately installing a recoil brake in secured privacy VERSUS cutting the barrel and keeping/using the gun in its illegal form then that's ON YOU! These absolutes you like to mouth are nothing more than scare tactics.

If one had to provide documentation to changes in a firearm things might be different but we do not!

Connor P Price
02-12-2012, 1:15 AM
Just don't try to equate removing and replacing a recoil pad or cutting a barrel and installing a recoil brake with driving around with an excuse me, dead hooker in my trunk. That's highly offensive. It's hyperbole meant to offend and to frighten.

I apologize that you took offense, that was never my intention, but once again you seem to misunderstand. The colloquial dead hooker analogy is an incredibly common one, especially on this forum (do a search, you'll see it comes up a ton) but it seems you may never have encountered it before so I'll explain. I was in no way equating what you were talking about to the gravity of killing or transporting a dead hooker. The point is that breaking the law is still illegal even when you have all your other ducks in a row, regardless of whether you are likely to get caught. My comment was in no way meant to offend or frighten as you suggest.



I never said it was legal to cut the barrel and leave it in that condition!


Its illegal to cut the barrel and have it in that condition for even a moment, it matters not what happens afterward. The proper method would be to remove the barrel entirely before cutting so that an SBS is never created. This way you don't have to worry about constructive possession either because as long as you have the muzzle device present you have a lenity outcome and never pass through an illegal configuration.


Don't for a moment think you can speak for me, particularly with that dead hooker crap! What I DID say was there is an often HUGE difference between the letter and the intent of the law. That's precisely how this would play out in court -- was the gun owner's intent (and their ability to perform) to install a brake without delay in secured privacy, rendering the gun in a legal configuration or was it to create, keep and use a shotgun in an illegal configuration? Huge, huge difference! Things are not as black/white, cut/dried as you would like to suggest.


It makes no difference that a gun began in legal configuration, nor that it ends in legal configuration, if it passes through an illegal configuration in the process a crime has been committed. Its exactly that black and white. You can probably do this every single day for the rest of your life and never get caught, but that's not the point. Again, something does not become legal just because you never get caught.


If you cannot see the DIFFERENCE between diligently cutting a shotgun barrel and immediately installing a recoil brake in secured privacy VERSUS cutting the barrel and keeping/using the gun in its illegal form then that's ON YOU! These absolutes you like to mouth are nothing more than scare tactics.

If one had to provide documentation to changes in a firearm things might be different but we do not!

Why do you think the single shot exemption process exists at all? At all points in time any firearm going through an SSE should be in a legal configuration. It was created specifically to avoid ever having a firearm pass through an illegal configuration.

The SSE, probably more than anything else I can imagine is specifically about abiding by the letter of the law. At all times, FFL's need to be abiding by the letter of the law in order for the process to be legal. You seem incredibly intent of your interpretation that the intent of the law matters so tell me, what was the intent of the roster if not to prevent people from obtaining off roster guns in CA?

If the intent of the law was what gets enforced then everyone with an SSE gun would be getting arrested for violating the intent of the law. Clearly they are staying out of jail by following the letter of the law and thumbing their noses at the intent.

Connor P Price
02-12-2012, 1:57 AM
I still disagree. The first person is the actual purchaser at the time, then sells it.
Whatever, unless this is clearly defined as bad nobody is going to get harassed for doing it once. It's legal on the surface, and ANYTHING could be maliciously prosecuted, like the FBI agent.


I understand there's quite a bit of disagreement on this point, and I agree that the prosecution of the FBI agent was a bit malicious. For now that's the only case law we have to go on along with the ATF's clear opinion that what we're discussing is not legal. Ultimately, your right that people would not be likely to be harassed for it at all. If they are harassed for it and are smart about it by keeping their mouths shut they're even less likely to be convicted. Considering the ATF's position and current case law I would still think its wise to tread cautiously.

The issue hasn't been settled to my satisfaction, I understand it's not 100% clear that I'm right on this one and I'm not saying that I am. I simply don't take it as 100% clear that you are right either. When something may potentially go either way, I'll err on the side that I know keeps me out of jail.


It's a little less clear than the family member buying it out of state situation, which people STILL argue about being "a straw purchase" but I wouldn't hesitate personally to ask someone out of state to install a mag lock on a gun before shipping it to my ffl.

I worry that the majority of the confusion here (and I think we all recognize that a lot of us disagree on this one) is stemming from the overuse of the term "straw purchase." There is no crime called a straw purchase, it simply doesn't exist. If we think about it as lying on the 4473 it becomes a bit more easy to discuss because that's the actual crime at hand.

On the last bit, I agree with you 100%. I would not hesitate at all asking someone to install a mag lock on a firearm i purchase from them before shipping to my ffl. I would not however enlist someone to act on my behalf by purchasing a firearm which they don't already possess for the sole purpose of transferring that firearm to me.

CSACANNONEER
02-12-2012, 6:43 AM
Did you miss the part about the gun being transferred between two FFLs? It really makes no difference if I give my friend the money up front and he sells me the rifle (via the FFLs, without more money exchanging hands) before the transfer or he pays for it and I reimburse him the entire sales price before the transfer via the FFLs. All the FFL's want to see is a receipt one way or the other.

This is NOT a matter of someone legally buying a gun and then illegally selling it to me off the books! :facepalm:

Do you not understand what a "straw purchase" is? A straw purchase occures is when someone buys a gun for someone who can not buy that gun (This is the EXACT situation you are in) or someone buys a gun for someone who does not want to do the paperwork. Just because your friend can change the configuration and then sell it to you through a FFL in your state does not change the fact that you are ineligible to purchase that gun and he is doing so for you. Getting FFLs involved in your illegal arms deals just puts them at as much risk as you will be in but, it does not limit your crimes at all. YES, even if you transfer through FFLs, certain transactions can still be considered "straw purchases". You still need to do more homework before asking questions.

The answer to the question that you claim to have researched so long and hard about was answered a long time ago. Yet, you are still looking at all your illegal options instead of just doing it legally. Are you for real or are you just trying to bait someone into actually acting on your poorly thought out and illegal senerios? What are you really trying to do here?

CSACANNONEER
02-12-2012, 9:38 AM
OK, so you are upset that I offended you because, you have been completely wrong from the beginning? Well, I'm sorry if I offended you but, lets look at some of the problems with your ideas from the beginning:

First:
I've read some threads on the SSE but I want to make sure I am not missing anything.

I order and pay for a Charger from someone willing to ship to my local FFL. When it arrives I open the box in the back room of the shop, remove the magazine (which I stick in my pocket) and install a plate (which requires a tool to remove) blocking the insertion of another magazine (or I might just swap-out stocks with one that already has a blocked magazine port.)
Then my FFL processes the firearm as a single shot pistol and I pick it up after the required wait Anything more to it? Does the payment/sale of the gun have to take place after the conversion or would I be OK as described? Thanks.

When I travel out of state to NV or AZ, is it legal for me to remove the blocking plate as long as I re-install it before reentering CA? Thanks again.

While we still don't know what this magical blocking plate is, you started out by wanting to have an AW shipped to your local FFL and then "in the back room" modify it. Of course, this would be criminal. Just because it is "in the back room" it does not make it legal.

Are you sure about that? I read in a few places where AWs can be shipped to CA so long as they are converted to non-AW status prior prior to processing. Further that Type 1 FFLs (typical gun shop) can do such conversions that once required a Type 7 FFL holder. I'm curious also if there is a distinction between buying such a firearm and having it shipped to my FFL versus actually buying it from my FFL here in CA?

I do know that the blocking plate cannot be removed here in CA even if one installed a bullet button. That's for certain.

Again, we still do not know what this magical blocking plate is but, we do know that it might be possible to remove it and it is possible to never need it in CA in the first place. Also, just simply following the link that you provided, it is clear that you are wrong about an 01 being able to preform the work you desire.

Goodness gracious! Sort of like a gun shop in here...

Just because you do not fully understand the different laws and how they relate and interact together, you attack me for posting the truth?

"Also, I would NEVER put an 01FFL into the situation where you are asking him/her to modify a firearm and "add value to it". That does require an 07FLL." <--- Wrong. That's like suggesting an Type 1 FFL cannot (for example) change out a stock or cut and re-crown a barrel or install some new sights on a firearm.

No, again it has been proven (by you and your links) to be correct and it is you who is mistaken.


I could go on qouting every single post you have in this thread and show you how your attitude and unwillingness to learn or inability to understand (I'm not sure which) has been your problem here. I have yet to be properly (yea, you've done it but without merit) corrected for anything I've posted here.


I just felt the need to quote some of your first posts before you edited them. That way, you will always be able to see the gross mistakes you were trying to make and the fact that I was trying to help you stay legal and out of jail. Anyway, since you apparently want to keep looking for illegal ways to traffic in firearms, you might want to make sure someone else will psot which facility you end up in. Some of us might be nice enough to put a buck or two on your books so that you can buy a Snickers bar.

12voltguy
02-12-2012, 11:34 AM
Did you miss the part about the gun being transferred between two FFLs? It really makes no difference if I give my friend the money up front and he sells me the rifle (via the FFLs, without more money exchanging hands) before the transfer or he pays for it and I reimburse him the entire sales price before the transfer via the FFLs. All the FFL's want to see is a receipt one way or the other.

This is NOT a matter of someone legally buying a gun and then illegally selling it to me off the books! :facepalm:

does not matter
Do you not understand what a "straw purchase" is? A straw purchase occures is when someone buys a gun for someone who can not buy that gun (This is the EXACT situation you are in) or someone buys a gun for someone who does not want to do the paperwork. Just because your friend can change the configuration and then sell it to you through a FFL in your state does not change the fact that you are ineligible to purchase that gun and he is doing so for you. Getting FFLs involved in your illegal arms deals just puts them at as much risk as you will be in but, it does not limit your crimes at all. YES, even if you transfer through FFLs, certain transactions can still be considered "straw purchases". You still need to do more homework before asking questions.

The answer to the question that you claim to have researched so long and hard about was answered a long time ago. Yet, you are still looking at all your illegal options instead of just doing it legally. Are you for real or are you just trying to bait someone into actually acting on your poorly thought out and illegal senerios? What are you really trying to do here?

no :p

joemama
02-12-2012, 12:42 PM
:lurk5:

CCrawford
02-13-2012, 8:32 AM
It would appear that these officers went through FFLs too.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=496228

Again it's buying with the expressed intent to resell or flipping the weapon. Each step in and of itself may be legal, but the chain of events make it illegal.

It California, it's not what is right or seemingly even legal; it's what the government with unlimited resources can get away with to discourage freedom.

Being a test case can be expensive. Play at your own peril.

gatesbox
02-13-2012, 8:40 AM
Hah, this thread is awesome, the most drama a .22lr could possibly muster...

OP, build one yourself with an 80% receiver, no FFL, No Problems.....end of story.... If in NorCal talk to Woody at Wine Country Weapons, he might be able to help you finish it if you buy the receiver from him.....

Excelsior
02-15-2012, 10:09 PM
It would appear that these officers went through FFLs too.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=496228

Again it's buying with the expressed intent to resell or flipping the weapon. Each step in and of itself may be legal, but the chain of events make it illegal.

It California, it's not what is right or seemingly even legal; it's what the government with unlimited resources can get away with to discourage freedom.

Being a test case can be expensive. Play at your own peril.

More FUD.

CSACANNONEER
02-16-2012, 5:58 AM
More FUD.

LMFAO! How the hell is the ATF's (not CA DOJ) investigation of LEOs who are going through FFLs and still illegally dealing in arms considered FUD? It is a FACT that this investigation is happening.

CCrawford
02-16-2012, 8:21 AM
Please, in detail, explain how it is FUD.

The officers will be glad to know they do not have to worry now.

If you or I was in charge, would this happen, no. We are not.

Excelsior
02-16-2012, 11:28 AM
Please, in detail, explain how it is FUD.

The officers will be glad to know they do not have to worry now.

If you or I was in charge, would this happen, no. We are not.

It's FUD because the transaction is being executed through FFL's and because there is no intent to hide the ultimate "owner" of the firearm.

Just like the guy who freaks out about "committing a felony" in the privacy and security of one's home while they are working on a firearm -- a process that will render the firearm in a legal configuration.

bwiese
02-16-2012, 11:51 AM
This thread has drifted.

If you want a Ruger Charger:


it has to be rendered into single-shot mode with a sled/filler such that it has zero-round
capacity outside of the chamber and locked down with a maglock/Bullet-Button type device.
This avoids Roster issues as it's a single shot.

The Charger may be dimensionally compliant already, not sure - needs to have 6" min barrel
length *and* 10.5" min. overall length, lengths measured parallel to bore.





After purchase the BulletButton needs to be retained and kept installed to avoid transition into
AW status after single-shot status is removed post-purchase/DROS/walk-out-the-door.

Remember THERE'S NO RIMIFIRE EXEMPTION IN AW LAWS FOR PISTOLS, only for rimfire *rifles*.

CCrawford
02-16-2012, 12:10 PM
While I agree that home private gunsmithing and a one time gun flip may not be ever noticed by the government, that does not mean it is legal.

Again in my "FUD", I showed where LEOs are being charged with crimes, most likely to be made examples of, that will end their careers if convicted and either way leave their saving less then before from their defense since it would appear their union is not helping. You have not shown where it is not the case. I cannot believe that the officers thought that the gun flipping - roster avoidance, if that ends up what is charged - via 4473 false documentation - would get them where their are today - arrested on unpaid leave.

Just like your car stop in one of your posts before, the officer that stopped you "went fishing" or was worried about their safety - and you admitted to lying in the post because it was none of the officers bussiness. Here you have left a public trail that I'm sure would become probable cause if needed for a warrent, etc. Remember, DOJ reads these posts per the powers here at CalGuns.

No one here has the power to stop you from doing what you want, we have just been outlining why it may not be best for you. You asked for help, many here pointed you in directions you do not want to go, or do not believe is right. OK, we get that. But the reality is that a few fish in the school do get caught every now and then and we do not suggest behavior that puts you out in open water.

ojisan
02-16-2012, 12:31 PM
The Charger is dimensionally compliant....the original barrel is 10.5" long all by itself.
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii112/50rob/charger.jpg

CSACANNONEER
02-16-2012, 2:58 PM
It's FUD because the transaction is being executed through FFL's and because there is no intent to hide the ultimate "owner" of the firearm.


How is it Fear? Uncertainty or Doubt? Well, one might be fearfull if the did an illegal straw purchase through FFLs in the first place. But, that's it. The simple fact is that if the first buyer goes through a FFL an purchases a firearm for someone who can not legally buy said firearm, it is a straw purchase. Since these transactions have been exactly that, a LEO buying a firearm with the intention of transfering (through a FFL or not) it to the real buyer, these transactions are straw purchases. Going through FFLs for each transfer does not make them any less of a straw purchase. How hard is it for you to grasp such a simple concept?

BTW, if you find an OOS 07FFL who is willing to make/install a maglock, I know a a FFL who would be happy to do the transfer for you.

Excelsior
02-18-2012, 1:51 AM
While I agree that home private gunsmithing and a one time gun flip may not be ever noticed by the government, that does not mean it is legal...

You're still not grasping the letter of the law versus the intent/spirit of the law. If I was making plans to cut the barrel on a shotgun and weld on a muzzle brake rendering a legal gun in the privacy of security of my garage and asked a knowledgeable person's advice, it would be wise for that person to make me understand that I should do the work in secured privacy and that once I cut the barrel I should not leave the shotgun it in that condition -- that I had better immediately finish the job. Most of all under no circumstances should I take the gun out in public after I cut the barrel but before I installed the brake.

What I find utterly distasteful are the ignorant, holier-tan-thou alarmist preachers ranting about "committing a felony" and that only a certain type of federally licensed gunsmith should ever undertake such a job. Utter malarkey. Pure bunkum. That sorta crap turns people off.

Let's indulge your fantasy. I cut the barrel on a shotgun (a model I cannot easily remove the barrel.) I turn-on the old Lincoln Idealarc 300/300 TIG to let the water start to circulate. I turn away from the welder to de-burr the end of the barrel before wiping down both the end of the barrel and the muzzle brake with lacquer thinner prior to welding. Just as I am finished fixturing everything I turn back around to see flames shooting out of the welder, I get spooked and I run out of the garage.

The fire department comes, puts out the fire and (increase fantasy level now) notices I am working on a shotgun and decides to call the cops. The cops measure the scorched shotgun and notice I did not yet tack-on the muzzle brake and arrest me.

I would really like my chances in court on something like that...

Something like that would be a WORLD away from defiantly cutting-off a shotgun's barrel to an illegal length and being arrested for using it at a public range in that condition.

On yeah, and it's not a "flip."

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 6:32 AM
You're still not grasping the letter of the law versus the intent/spirit of the law. If I was making plans to cut the barrel on a shotgun and weld on a muzzle brake rendering a legal gun in the privacy of security of my garage and asked a knowledgeable person's advice, it would be wise for that person to make me understand that I should do the work in secured privacy and that once I cut the barrel I should not leave the shotgun it in that condition -- that I had better immediately finish the job. Most of all under no circumstances should I take the gun out in public after I cut the barrel but before I installed the brake.

What I find utterly distasteful are the ignorant, holier-tan-thou alarmist preachers ranting about "committing a felony" and that only a certain type of federally licensed gunsmith should ever undertake such a job. Utter malarkey. Pure bunkum. That sorta crap turns people off.
Let's indulge your fantasy. I cut the barrel on a shotgun (a model I cannot easily remove the barrel.) I turn-on the old Lincoln Idealarc 300/300 TIG to let the water start to circulate. I turn away from the welder to de-burr the end of the barrel before wiping down both the end of the barrel and the muzzle brake with lacquer thinner prior to welding. Just as I am finished fixturing everything I turn back around to see flames shooting out of the welder, I get spooked and I run out of the garage.

The fire department comes, puts out the fire and (increase fantasy level now) notices I am working on a shotgun and decides to call the cops. The cops measure the scorched shotgun and notice I did not yet tack-on the muzzle brake and arrest me.

I would really like my chances in court on something like that...

Something like that would be a WORLD away from defiantly cutting-off a shotgun's barrel to an illegal length and being arrested for using it at a public range in that condition.

On yeah, and it's not a "flip."

No, the sort of crap that turns people off is trying to justify committing crimes just becase the final outcome is legal and the crime will just be occuring for a short period of time. ANYONE who thinks that actions like this are legal or even condonable needs to get there head examined and should not own a firearm at all. If one was to use your flawed logic, mag buttons (ie. "FELONY buttons") or quickly backing out a P50 lock and then retightening it would be legal in CA. Guess what, they are not legal actions and people have been convicted of crimes due to their doing so. The same holds true for lieing on a 4473 and stating that you are the ACTULA purchaser even if a second 4473 is later done to transfer it to the ACTUAL purchaser. The crime on the original 4473 has still been committed and someone can still go to prision for it. Your ideas scare the hell out of honest gun owners. Anyone who follows your advise can and will give gun owners a bad name and only help the antis. Or, is that your true goal? Are you really trying to bring down the 2nd from behind the lines?

bigcalidave
02-18-2012, 8:32 AM
Why do you insist on calling it a straw purchase, like a broken record! The person who ends up with the gun during each transaction is legally making the purchase, so there is nobody making this straw purchase for an illegal buyer. At most the interpretation could be that it's a crapshoot, not that it is certainly violating the rules. the rest of the last post reads like you are having a bad morning. Please chill with that stuff, nobody is trying to hurt the cause here.

Sorry, on my phone, quoting doesn't work well.



... illegal straw purchase through FFLs in the first place. ...firearm, it is a straw purchase....

ke6guj
02-18-2012, 9:09 AM
You're still not grasping the letter of the law versus the intent/spirit of the law. If I was making plans to cut the barrel on a shotgun and weld on a muzzle brake rendering a legal gun in the privacy of security of my garage and asked a knowledgeable person's advice, it would be wise for that person to make me understand that I should do the work in secured privacy and that once I cut the barrel I should not leave the shotgun it in that condition -- that I had better immediately finish the job. Most of all under no circumstances should I take the gun out in public after I cut the barrel but before I installed the brake.

What I find utterly distasteful are the ignorant, holier-tan-thou alarmist preachers ranting about "committing a felony" and that only a certain type of federally licensed gunsmith should ever undertake such a job. Utter malarkey. Pure bunkum. That sorta crap turns people off.

Let's indulge your fantasy. I cut the barrel on a shotgun (a model I cannot easily remove the barrel.) I turn-on the old Lincoln Idealarc 300/300 TIG to let the water start to circulate. I turn away from the welder to de-burr the end of the barrel before wiping down both the end of the barrel and the muzzle brake with lacquer thinner prior to welding. Just as I am finished fixturing everything I turn back around to see flames shooting out of the welder, I get spooked and I run out of the garage.

The fire department comes, puts out the fire and (increase fantasy level now) notices I am working on a shotgun and decides to call the cops. The cops measure the scorched shotgun and notice I did not yet tack-on the muzzle brake and arrest me.

I would really like my chances in court on something like that...

Something like that would be a WORLD away from defiantly cutting-off a shotgun's barrel to an illegal length and being arrested for using it at a public range in that condition.

On yeah, and it's not a "flip."

spirit of the law won't always protect you in court. in your scenario above, it would be your word that the fire happened during the exact time frame you were "temporarily" violating the law, so you should get a pass. And yes, you would have to defend that word to the DA and possibly in court.


The bottom line is that neither CA nor Federal SBR law allow for "temporary SBR" configuratoins just because you have to make an SBR in order to convert the firearm into a new legal configuration.

The chances of you getting caught doing it is slim, but that doesn't mean that you can tell everyone to go ahead and temporarily break the law behind closed doors in secured privacy.



Why do you insist on calling it a straw purchase, like a broken record! The person who ends up with the gun during each transaction is legally making the purchase, so there is nobody making this straw purchase for an illegal buyer. At most the interpretation could be that it's a crapshoot, not that it is certainly violating the rules. the rest of the last post reads like you are having a bad morning. Please chill with that stuff, nobody is trying to hurt the cause here.

who is this directed to? Greg never said "straw purchase" in the post directly above yours.

AFAIK, there is no legal definition of "straw purchase", as such, it can encompass multiple meanings and is used to describe an illegal purchase and subsequent transfer, not always to a prohibited person.

I can point to a real life example where a person did "legally" purchase firearms on a 4473, and then did a second "legal" transaction to a third party, and was convicted of "causing the FFL to maintain false records" because he marked on the 4473 that he was the true purchaser but the feds were able to "prove" that he bought those firearms with the intent to resell them.

And the deal with the sacramento cops right now being looked at by the feds for "flipping" off-roster handguns through PPTs is an active case right now. Scenario is that LEO buys a handgun on a 4473 and then has the handgun transfered to the "real buyer" on another 4473. The case may not go anywhere, but it is actively looked at right now by the feds. That means something.

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 9:15 AM
So, you would condone breaking the law for a little while? Or, falsifying government documents?

bigcalidave
02-18-2012, 11:30 AM
And I can keep pointing to the ATF guide and other info from them that says things like

" This new consumer awareness program reinforces the message that buying a gun for someone who is prohibited is a federal crime "
" The denial of guns to prohibited persons is critical to the mission of ATF in preventing violent crime and protecting the nation."
" father could truthfully complete the Form 4473 to indicate that he is the actual purchaser because he would take title to the weapon and then transfer the firearm "

That says, clear as day, that you can be the actual purchaser and then transfer the firearm immediately.

Since neither of us can PROVE that we are correct, saying that the person commits a felony for lying on a 4473 is a LIE. Both of your examples are active cases, so using them doesn't prove anything more than malicious prosecution is possible.

I just found this information, where the exact opposite of your examples has already been through court.

http://www.policeissues.com/html/gun_control_09.html#AmericaGunPurveyor

Judge Gottsfield concluded that under the circumstances that falsehood didn’t amount to a crime. Here’s an extract from his order exonerating Iknadosian:

The state’s case is based upon testimony of individuals who falsified question 11a on ATF Form 4473, i.e. that they were the actual purchaser of the firearms when they were not. The court agrees with the defense that for such falsity to amount to a fraudulent scheme or artifice...the falsification has to be a material misrepresentation. In order to be material, the falsification has to have resulted in an unlawful or prohibited person obtaining the weapons.

ATF Form 4473 is a Federal form, so the judge turned to Federal law to find out what it takes to falsify it. Title 18, United States Code, § 922 (a)(6) forbids gun buyers from making “any false or fictitious oral or written statement...likely to deceive [a dealer] with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of [a] firearm or ammunition under the provisions of this chapter [emphasis added] .” Among other things, dealers can’t deliver guns to felons, illegal aliens, juveniles, the adjudicated mentally ill and nonresidents (to keep local laws from being circumvented, persons are forbidden from buying guns outside their State of residence.) However, the law is silent about “straw purchase,” the practice of buying guns for others. There’s nothing in “the provisions of this Chapter” that forbids a dealer from selling guns to someone who intends to turn them over to a legally qualified possessor.

There’s no question but that straw purchases took place. But since the Gamez brothers and the pretend buyers were Arizona adults with clean records, and no evidence was introduced that a prohibited person wound up with a gun, the “yes” answers, while false, weren’t materially so. That view has been endorsed by appeals courts. In U.S. v. Polk, the only known case directly on point, the Fifth Circuit held that “if the true purchaser can lawfully purchase a firearm directly, § 922(a)(6) liability under a ‘straw purchase’ theory does not attach.” More recently, in U.S. v. Ortiz, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that “straw purchases of firearms occur when an unlawful purchaser...uses a lawful ‘straw man’ purchaser...to obtain a firearm [emphasis added].”

Excelsior
02-18-2012, 11:46 AM
spirit of the law won't always protect you in court. in your scenario above, it would be your word that the fire happened during the exact time frame you were "temporarily" violating the law, so you should get a pass. And yes, you would have to defend that word to the DA and possibly in court.


The bottom line is that neither CA nor Federal SBR law allow for "temporary SBR" configuratoins just because you have to make an SBR in order to convert the firearm into a new legal configuration.

The chances of you getting caught doing it is slim, but that doesn't mean that you can tell everyone to go ahead and temporarily break the law behind closed doors in secured privacy.





who is this directed to? Greg never said "straw purchase" in the post directly above yours.

AFAIK, there is no legal definition of "straw purchase", as such, it can encompass multiple meanings and is used to describe an illegal purchase and subsequent transfer, not always to a prohibited person.

I can point to a real life example where a person did "legally" purchase firearms on a 4473, and then did a second "legal" transaction to a third party, and was convicted of "causing the FFL to maintain false records" because he marked on the 4473 that he was the true purchaser but the feds were able to "prove" that he bought those firearms with the intent to resell them.

And the deal with the sacramento cops right now being looked at by the feds for "flipping" off-roster handguns through PPTs is an active case right now. Scenario is that LEO buys a handgun on a 4473 and then has the handgun transfered to the "real buyer" on another 4473. The case may not go anywhere, but it is actively looked at right now by the feds. That means something.

FUD x 2

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 1:11 PM
FUD x 2

Let's see.....do we listen to the guy who has researched NFA and CA laws enough to be the first civilian in CA to bring in a NFA item in decades or, do we listen to some guy who seems to think it's OK to break the law if no one catches him? Hum??? Do we listen to someone who has been extremely active in fighting for Californian's 2A rights or some faceless keyboard commando who doesn't even know what "FUD" is an acronym for?

12voltguy
02-18-2012, 1:17 PM
Let's see.....do we listen to the guy who has researched NFA and CA laws enough to be the first civilian in CA to bring in a NFA item in decades or, do we listen to some guy who seems to think it's OK to break the law if no one catches him? Hum??? Do we listen to someone who has been extremely active in fighting for Californian's 2A rights or some faceless keyboard commando who doesn't even know what "FUD" is an acronym for?

logic will get you nowhere:facepalm::oji::)

DUF:eek:

Excelsior
02-18-2012, 2:00 PM
logic will get you nowhere.



"Logic?" or biased/ignorant interpretation? Trolls will be trolls, aye?

Connor P Price
02-18-2012, 2:05 PM
Let's see.....do we listen to the guy who has researched NFA and CA laws enough to be the first civilian in CA to bring in a NFA item in decades or, do we listen to some guy who seems to think it's OK to break the law if no one catches him? Hum??? Do we listen to someone who has been extremely active in fighting for Californian's 2A rights or some faceless keyboard commando who doesn't even know what "FUD" is an acronym for?

CSA, at a certain point we're just talking to a wall. Its come time for a brief facepalm and an acknowledgement that we are getting nowhere.

Excelsior
02-18-2012, 2:06 PM
spirit of the law won't always protect you in court...

Nor will the letter of the law, unfortunately. I'm just tired of the ignorant trolls who start screaming "FELONY" when someone asks a constructive question. All their knee-jerk popping-off does is scare, confuse and offend others.

Be it public ranges or gun shops, I don't think I can name another setting where more ignorant/misled people feel the need to pontificate with levels od self-righteousness suggesting they are actual experts or at least skilled at explaining matters to others -- which they clearly are not. More often than not all they do is spew FUD while further inflating their egos.

Connor P Price
02-18-2012, 2:20 PM
Be it public ranges or gun shops, I don't think I can name another setting where more ignorant/misled people feel the need to pontificate with levels od self-righteousness suggesting they are actual experts or at least skilled at explaining matters to others -- which they clearly are not. More often than not all they do is spew FUD while further inflating their egos.

http://www.oxonianreview.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/irony.jpg

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 2:24 PM
Nor will the letter of the law, unfortunately. I'm just tired of the ignorant trolls who start screaming "FELONY" when someone asks a constructive question. All their knee-jerk popping-off does is scare, confuse and offend others.

Be it public ranges or gun shops, I don't think I can name another setting where more ignorant/misled people feel the need to pontificate with levels od self-righteousness suggesting they are actual experts or at least skilled at explaining matters to others -- which they clearly are not. More often than not all they do is spew FUD while further inflating their egos.

Yea, the guy who got AOWs into CA and has written the shotgun AW flowchart doesn't know crap and is spreading FUD. You might want to learn a little bit about those you are talking about before proving your utter ignorance yet again.

Excelsior
02-18-2012, 7:06 PM
spirit of the law won't always protect you in court. in your scenario above, it would be your word that the fire happened during the exact time frame you were "temporarily" violating the law, so you should get a pass. And yes, you would have to defend that word to the DA and possibly in court.

The bottom line is that neither CA nor Federal SBR law allow for "temporary SBR" configuratoins just because you have to make an SBR in order to convert the firearm into a new legal configuration.

The chances of you getting caught doing it is slim, but that doesn't mean that you can tell everyone to go ahead and temporarily break the law behind closed doors in secured privacy.

who is this directed to? Greg never said "straw purchase" in the post directly above yours.

AFAIK, there is no legal definition of "straw purchase", as such, it can encompass multiple meanings and is used to describe an illegal purchase and subsequent transfer, not always to a prohibited person.

I can point to a real life example where a person did "legally" purchase firearms on a 4473, and then did a second "legal" transaction to a third party, and was convicted of "causing the FFL to maintain false records" because he marked on the 4473 that he was the true purchaser but the feds were able to "prove" that he bought those firearms with the intent to resell them.

And the deal with the sacramento cops right now being looked at by the feds for "flipping" off-roster handguns through PPTs is an active case right now. Scenario is that LEO buys a handgun on a 4473 and then has the handgun transfered to the "real buyer" on another 4473. The case may not go anywhere, but it is actively looked at right now by the feds. That means something.

I'm curious, would you ever purchase a firearm that was completely legal whose configuration at one time necessitated it to be in what you term a "temporary SBR configuration" without a receipt from a Type 7 FFL specifically detailing the completed work? It not, how come? The legal firearm would be physical proof that a FELONY once took place in your eyes. Just how would you get around that? If the work wasn't completed by a Type 7 FFL do you feel you are insulated because you didn't do the work yourself? What if the person you bought it from (the one committing a FELONY in your eyes) denied selling it to you in its current configuration? What then?

What if you added a muzzle break to your good old Remington 870. Before cutting the barrel to 14" you removed it from the receiver of course to make it easier to cut and so that you would not commit a "temporary SBR configuration FELONY" of course. If a LEO saw the brake (making the barrel over 16" long) on your 870 and you were without documentation from a Type 7 FFL, how would he know you first removed the barrel? If they were coming after you it would be strictly your word against there's in court in your world of "temporary SBR configurations" right?

What would you do if someone (God forbid) dropped a long gun at the range where the butt stock became separated from the rest of the firearm? Would you run around screaming that the person had committed a FELONY or would you realize that was not their intent (like the person installing the muzzle brake in the privacy and security of their garage)?

Speaking of broken stocks, replacing one on MANY firearms would render what you believe to be a "temporary SBR configurations." Do you have a concern that people might get arrested if they replaced the stock themselves? Is it dangerous to go to the range with new (and legal) stocks on certain firearms?

Reactionary reductionists should not be spewing their palls of negativity and fear. It's always prudent to be cautious and prepared. It's wrong to shift one's brain into neutral and judge others to be committing felonies...

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 7:43 PM
There's no law against owning evidence as long as the evidence is legal to own.

Jack legally owns a "good old 870" based AOW so, he could legally cut a barrel down to 14" or 3" for it without having to worry about constructive possession of a SBS. He does not need to be an 07FFL to do this.

A broken gun is a broken gun. However continuing to use a firearm which is broken to the point which would make it illegal is illegal. So, a broken stock is a broken gun but, if one keeps using a firearm with a broken stock which ends up being under 26" OAL, they run the risk of being procescuted.

There is a difference between replacing a stock and cutting a barrel to the point that constructive possession would kick in.

No one is spewing anything that can't be backed up with written law, case law or ATF written opinion letters except you. If you truely believe the crap you're posting, why don't you back it up by writting an a letter to ATF and getting their opinion? Their opinion letter, address to you, would go an awful long way in court. I've been to lazy to do this myself but, I have stopped by their booth an SHOT and asked their opinion about many issues. I have also listened to their answers and the reasons they give for their answers. (You might want to reread that last sentence a few time. You might learn something if you do.) Understanding how the justice system works and the simple fact that the letter of the law is the law and not just a guideline to understand the spirit of the law would help one in the quest to be prepared and cautious. Getting opinion letters from ATF would also help. But, just spewing the nonesense that is coming from your ouji keyboard isn't doing anything except exposing you for what you are. It is wrong to keep proposing that it's OK to commit felonies as long as no one catches you and that's the bottom line.

CSACANNONEER
02-18-2012, 7:46 PM
Trolls will be trolls, aye?

The proof is in the pudding.

ke6guj
02-18-2012, 8:41 PM
I'm curious, would you ever purchase a firearm that was completely legal whose configuration at one time necessitated it to be in what you term a "temporary SBR configuration" without a receipt from a Type 7 FFL specifically detailing the completed work? It not, how come? The legal firearm would be physical proof that a FELONY once took place in your eyes. Just how would you get around that? If the work wasn't completed by a Type 7 FFL do you feel you are insulated because you didn't do the work yourself? What if the person you bought it from (the one committing a FELONY in your eyes) denied selling it to you in its current configuration? What then?I am unaware of many firearms that would require it be made into a tempoary SBR configuration in order to made into a particular legal configuration. In most cases, there would be a legal way to make sure that you never had an SBR on your hands, even temporarily. As such, I would not have an problem owning one of those firearms.

That is different than telliing people that they can take an assembled rifle or shotgun and, while in the privacy of their home, just take a hacksaw to the end of the barrel and cut it below 16"/18" and then immediately weld on a muzzle extension. I already said that the chances of you getting caught doing it are slim, but that doesn't mean that it is legal to do so.

What if you added a muzzle break to your good old Remington 870. Before cutting the barrel to 14" you removed it from the receiver of course to make it easier to cut and so that you would not commit a "temporary SBR configuration FELONY" of course. If a LEO saw the brake (making the barrel over 16" long) on your 870 and you were without documentation from a Type 7 FFL, how would he know you first removed the barrel? If they were coming after you it would be strictly your word against there's in court in your world of "temporary SBR configurations" right?Well, since I own no Title 1 remington 870s, and any 870s that I own have already have a tax stamp that exempts them from CA SBS laws, I dont' see the problem here.

What would you do if someone (God forbid) dropped a long gun at the range where the butt stock became separated from the rest of the firearm? Would you run around screaming that the person had committed a FELONY or would you realize that was not their intent (like the person installing the muzzle brake in the privacy and security of their garage)?there is a difference between an inadventantly broken stock that renders a firearm disabled (unless you decide to keep using it while it is broken) and intentionally taking a hacksaw to the barrel or stock of an assembled firearm and creating an temporary SBS/SBR so that you can reconfigure it into a legal Title 1 firearm.

Speaking of broken stocks, replacing one on MANY firearms would render what you believe to be a "temporary SBR configurations." Do you have a concern that people might get arrested if they replaced the stock themselves? Is it dangerous to go to the range with new (and legal) stocks on certain firearms?If you can't see that there is a difference between disasembling a firearm into component parts and then reassembling it with a new stock is different from hacksawing an assembled firearm into one that is subject to the NFA, even temporarily, I don't know what to say.

Reactionary reductionists should not be spewing their palls of negativity and fear. It's always prudent to be cautious and prepared. It's wrong to shift one's brain into neutral and judge others to be committing felonies...:facepalm:

CCrawford
02-19-2012, 9:41 AM
OK, think of it this way - You are following a truck going 45 mph. The road has a speed limit of 55 mph. You find a safe place to pass. While safely passing, you get to 70 mph and then slow back down to 55 mph once you complete passing the truck. There is no legal exemption for going 70 mph during passing. The letter of the law was broken during that brief instant, but not the spirit as you are planning on following the 55 mph speed limit.

Now would an officer pull you over for it. May or may not, depends on the officer, etc. And while no officer may be within one mile, whether it is legal or not is not dependent on the officer's location. Getting caught does not determine if it's legal.

You may be able to get out of it at traffic court, you may not. Either way, you will spend time and maybe some money trying to get out of it at traffic court.

Again, the crimes we are discussing are not numerous - and many may be dismissed or plead down to not include the original charge. But, once arrested, your life will change for the worse. You may get away with a small slap on the wrist.

Most folks here have advised to follow a certain "proven" path and there will be little to no chance of problems. Wondering off the path can lead to finding a landmine. You may no find a mine, but you may.

Lastly, what do you say to the FBI agent that was convicted of the specific thing we are discussing and the Sac officers that are charged with lying on a 4473?

It may be wrong, but it is happening and being a test case is no fun.

ke6guj
02-19-2012, 10:53 AM
And I have gotten a speeding ticket for doing exactly that. Passed a slower vehicle while I was towing a trailer and I was given a ticket for exceding the 55mph speed limt.

morrcarr67
02-19-2012, 11:14 AM
And I have gotten a speeding ticket for doing exactly that. Passed a slower vehicle while I was towing a trailer and I was given a ticket for exceding the 55mph speed limt.

Don't forget about the lane restrictions too Jack.



Towing Vehicles, Buses, or Large Trucks

When you tow a vehicle or trailer, or drive a bus or three or more axle truck, you must drive in the right hand lane or in a lane specially marked for slower vehicles. If no lanes are marked and there are four lanes or more in your direction, you may only drive in either of the two lanes closest to the right edge of the road.

morrcarr67
02-19-2012, 11:15 AM
BTW - I can't believe we are still talking about this :facepalm: