PDA

View Full Version : Slidefire question


abcsfamilyman
03-17-2012, 8:44 AM
This question goes out to any Calgunner that has been a member for 5 or more years. This may be a dumb question but I am curious as to weather or not the bullet button had a similar response on Calguns.net back when it first came out as the Slidefire is currently getting? Is it at all possible that this could be the next bullet button and loophole breakthrough? Current opinions are very clear, however I am very curious about the bullet button's first reaction as a loophole for CA.

Write Winger
03-17-2012, 8:53 AM
The BB came about due to using the specific language of the law and finding liberty within the law (otherwise known as a loophole). Something like the slide fire is specifically made illegal in the law, so there's no room for liberty.

Dr Rockso
03-17-2012, 9:06 AM
Not similar. There was already a lot of clarity on the issue when magazine locks came on the scene, including a California Supreme Court decision. Nothing of the sort exists for the multiburst trigger actuator law.

boamedt
03-17-2012, 9:18 AM
Im with the op as a slidefire stock does not burst fire, ie more than one bullet per trigger pull. Nor does increase rate of fire either as u can manually bumpfire the rifle without the stock to that same rate of fire as the slidfire stock will bumpfire. So I dont think it quailfies as illegal imho

CSACANNONEER
03-17-2012, 9:36 AM
Bullet Buttons came after many other mag lock designs, all of which already followed the letter of the law. Slidefire stocks came after many other multiburst trigger actuators (under Ca's legal definition), all of which have been and are still felonies in Ca. The slidefire stock increases the rate of fire, right? So, what is your question again?

The Gleam
03-17-2012, 9:58 AM
Im with the op as a slidefire stock does not burst fire, ie more than one bullet per trigger pull. Nor does increase rate of fire either as u can manually bumpfire the rifle without the stock to that same rate of fire as the slidfire stock will bumpfire. So I dont think it quailfies as illegal imho

If without doubt they were legal, I would buy one just for the novelty. However my life is already filled with plenty of fun novelties so I think I will survive without it. There have been too many convincing responses here on Calguns from people that I trust, like bweise and Gene, to mess around with it. Also, see my next post below.

When OLL/OLR came around back in August 2005, I was one of the first people in line for AR receivers at CWS late night in Highland, CA. Same when deduction came along for NDS AK style receiver, and the BB. That just made logical sense within the law, especially since I was already in possession of a couple of Robinson Armament M96's and followed the lack-of-pistol grip "featureless" along with the futility of DOJ's arrests about it, several years earlier.

Unfortunately, the slide-fire has ambiguities to it in CA that do not make me feel as comfortable as I did with the scenarios above. Outside of CA, yes it's likely legal in most states, but CA law as we know is like another country altogether.

Besides, even if they were legal, I don't think I've got a range or space within 100 miles that I could use it without getting kicked out of the range for more than 1 round per sec. :(

The Gleam
03-17-2012, 10:06 AM
Saving Mr. Librarian some time: NOTE THE FIRST SECTION PC16930 which does not designate how it activates; it simply dictates device and attached and the use of the word "EITHER" meaning the first part below in bold (a) applies independently:

Multiburst trigger activators are forbidden by California law.
PC 16930
Quote:
California Penal Code Section 16930

As used in this part, a "multiburst trigger activator" means
either of the following:
(a) A device designed or redesigned to be attached to a
semiautomatic firearm, which allows the firearm to discharge two or
more shots in a burst by activating the device.
(b) A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed
and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm it
increases the rate of fire of that firearm.

and


California Penal Code Section 32900

Except as provided in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any person in this state who
manufactures or causes to be manufactured,
imports into the state,
keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or
who gives, lends, or possesses
any multiburst trigger activator is punishable by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state
prison.

And it can be charged as a felony. :(

G60
03-17-2012, 10:25 AM
"This may be a dumb question..."

Correct.

abcsfamilyman
03-17-2012, 10:54 AM
Saving Mr. Librarian some time: NOTE THE FIRST SECTION PC16930 which does not designate how it activates; it simply dictates device and attached and the use of the word "EITHER" meaning the first part below in bold (a) applies independently:
and
And it can be charged as a felony. :(

Point taken but this is what gets me, it is not a burst mode by definition. Or is it? The trigger is pulled by shooters finger every time, read below:
In automatic firearms, burst mode or burst fire is a firing mode enabling the shooter to fire a predetermined number of rounds, usually 2 or 3 rounds on hand held weapons and 100+ on anti-aircraft weapons, with a single pull of the trigger. This firing mode is commonly used in submachine guns, assault rifles and carbines. Other types of firearms, such as machine pistols (e.g., the Beretta 93R) may also have a burst mode.
The burst mode is normally employed as an intermediate fire mode between semi-automatic and fully automatic, although some firearms lack a "full auto" capability and use a burst mode instead. For instance, the M16A2 (the standard-issue service rifle of the U.S. military) has, in addition to the semi-automatic mode, a 3-round burst mode, which replaced the fully automatic mode of the previous M16A1. The reason for this replacement was the massive waste of ammunition and very poor performance of soldiers who fired their rifles in fully automatic mode during the Vietnam War.
The number of rounds fired in a burst is almost universally determined by a cam mechanism that trips the trigger mechanism for each shot in the burst. Some designs, as employed on the M16A2, will terminate the burst if the trigger is released before the burst is complete, while others will reset the cam position, so the next burst will fire a full number of rounds.

boamedt
03-17-2012, 11:15 AM
Obviousy no one read my post. It does not increase ur rate of fire. U can do it without the stock....what about this do people not get? Ad stated above it is the deffinition of semi automatic action. One bullet per trigger pull ......i dont see how this is up for debate

boamedt
03-17-2012, 11:16 AM
There is no law that says u cant fire 900rnds a min

CSACANNONEER
03-17-2012, 11:22 AM
Obviousy no one read my post. It does not increase ur rate of fire. U can do it without the stock....what about this do people not get? Ad stated above it is the deffinition of semi automatic action. One bullet per trigger pull ......i dont see how this is up for debate

Federal law vs. state law. Do you have the money to defend yourself?

jj805
03-17-2012, 12:12 PM
I am confused, What is the difference when it comes to attaching a device that increases the firing rate? The rate of fire is not changed, and anybody can learn how to maximise the firing rate without the slide fire stock. You can even bumpfire a pistol. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MydCuTfgt0k . I my be asking too much, but an answer a little more elaborate than "do you want to be the test case" would be appreciated.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 12:23 PM
I have had the privilege to shoot the SlideFire. It took several magazines before I was able to develop the "Shooting Technique". You have a buffer of around 7-10 lbs of pressure pushing away from you with your non shooting hand for it to work. If you apply too little pressure or too much pressure the "Shooting Technique" will not work. I can also Bump Fire from my belt loop, which is also another "Shooting Technique" that is legal. The video's on SlideFire make it look a lot easier that it actually is. The SlideFire by it's self does not allow you to bump fire your AR. It's a "Shooting Technique" that you can apply when using this stock. It's a lot safer than using your belt loop because you have complete control of your gun at all time and you can keep a descent pattern while doing it.

One round for one trigger pull. The trigger is being fully pressed with your finger and fully released with your finger. Just the same as using your belt loop, but you have more control. Modifying your trigger will increase the rate of fire more than the SlideFire Stock.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 12:33 PM
Definition of Burst Firing

In automatic firearms, burst mode or burst fire is a firing mode enabling the shooter to fire a predetermined number of rounds, usually 2 or 3 rounds on hand held weapons and 100+ on anti-aircraft weapons, with a single pull of the trigger. This firing mode is commonly used in submachine guns, assault rifles and carbines. Other types of firearms, such as machine pistols (e.g., the Beretta 93R) may also have a burst mode.

Definition of Bump Firing:

Bump firing is the act of using the recoil of a firearm to fire multiple shots in rapid succession. This process involves holding the foregrip with the non-trigger hand, releasing the grip on the firing hand (leaving the trigger finger in its normal position in front of the trigger), pushing the rifle forward in order to apply pressure on the trigger finger from the trigger, and keeping the trigger finger stationary. The firearm will recoil and then return to its previous position after the round has been fired first resetting and then pressing forward against the trigger thereby firing successive shots.
The relatively-rapid bursts from semi-automatic firearms crudely simulate the discharge of automatic firearms. Even though a large number of rounds are fired in rapid succession, the trigger finger initiates each discharge; therefore, fully automatic fire is not actually taking place.

SlideFire allows you to develop a Bump Firing "Shooting Technique".

Capybara
03-17-2012, 12:43 PM
I have been researching AR pistols, VFGs, OAL, etc. and learning a lot about how or gun laws in California work versus how the gun laws work on a Federal level.

This is undoubtedly a naive question but bear with me. For our more experienced legally savvy Calgunners, why is it that the ATF seems so willing and forthcoming to make judgements and rulings for individuals, sending letters that are widely disseminated in our community as at least a basis for what is permissible on a federal level, yet the CADOJ seems so close-lipped and arbitrary? Is it because the Feds are just more level-headed and less ruled by anti-gunners than Sacramento?

It just seems ridiculous from an enforcement and compliance standpoint, to have a legal body that rules in such an arbitrary and capricious manner, it smacks of a dictatorship. Have there been any NRA or CRPA lawsuits against the CADOJ to encourage them to operate less like a fiefdom and more like a normal governmental authority?

It would nice if the manufacturer could just send a sample to the CADOJ and the CADOJ could just issue a bulletin, stating unequivocally that the SlideFire is legal or illegal to use in California? Is it just that the CADOJ likes to make it a PITA for us to know our own laws?

Jeepers
03-17-2012, 12:48 PM
Bullet Buttons came after many other mag lock designs, all of which already followed the letter of the law. Slidefire stocks came after many other multiburst trigger actuators (under Ca's legal definition), all of which have been and are still felonies in Ca. The slidefire stock increases the rate of fire, right? So, what is your question again?
how do you figure ? you can not increase the rate of fire on any semi auto , it only fires as fast as the trigger is pulled via regular firing or bump firing the rate of fire is never increased from its original configuration

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 12:53 PM
FYI to all The CADOJ has had two SlideFire Stocks in their possession for 9 months. Their opinion is "They have no opinion" which means they are not deeming it as being illegal, otherwise they would have an opinion stating that.

paratroop
03-17-2012, 1:00 PM
The reality of it is the slidefire stock, and bump firing do not in fact increase the cyclic rate of the weapon. But what is the definition of "rate of fire." Some folks can pull the trigger faster than others...increased rate of fire? Nobody can pull the trigger faster than the weapon system will allow.

Until CADOJ defines "rate of fire" and/or somebody gets prosectuted for the stock we may never know. But im not willing to be the test dummy on that one.

Ubermcoupe
03-17-2012, 1:01 PM
FYI to all The CADOJ has had two SlideFire Stocks in their possession for 9 months. Their opinion is "They have no opinion" which means they are not deeming it as being illegal, otherwise they would have an opinion stating that.

Can you link to the DOJ memo that says they have no opinion please?

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 1:04 PM
The reality of it is the slidefire stock, and bump firing do not in fact increase the cyclic rate of the weapon. But what is the definition of "rate of fire." Some folks can pull the trigger faster than others...increased rate of fire? Nobody can pull the trigger faster than the weapon system will allow.

Until CADOJ defines "rate of fire" and/or somebody gets prosectuted for the stock we may never know. But im not willing to be the test dummy on that one.

It's not about "rate of fire" in (23) (b). It's about A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm. And SlideFire is not that.

Jeepers
03-17-2012, 1:05 PM
its all a matter of time i have seen them for sale in public view here in cali, so sooner or later we all will find out just how legal they are under our laws.....

i wont be a test case, but someone will be ....

Librarian
03-17-2012, 1:12 PM
I have been researching AR pistols, VFGs, OAL, etc. and learning a lot about how or gun laws in California work versus how the gun laws work on a Federal level.

This is undoubtedly a naive question but bear with me. For our more experienced legally savvy Calgunners, why is it that the ATF seems so willing and forthcoming to make judgements and rulings for individuals, sending letters that are widely disseminated in our community as at least a basis for what is permissible on a federal level, yet the CADOJ seems so close-lipped and arbitrary? Is it because the Feds are just more level-headed and less ruled by anti-gunners than Sacramento?

It just seems ridiculous from an enforcement and compliance standpoint, to have a legal body that rules in such an arbitrary and capricious manner, it smacks of a dictatorship. Have there been any NRA or CRPA lawsuits against the CADOJ to encourage them to operate less like a fiefdom and more like a normal governmental authority?

It would nice if the manufacturer could just send a sample to the CADOJ and the CADOJ could just issue a bulletin, stating unequivocally that the SlideFire is legal or illegal to use in California? Is it just that the CADOJ likes to make it a PITA for us to know our own laws?

The underlying assumption of your question is that CA-DOJ is supposed to have some element of service to the public.

Under its current leadership, and leadership it has had back into the 1990s, that has not been the case in relation to gun owners.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 1:24 PM
Can you link to the DOJ memo that says they have no opinion please?

You will never get that memo, because they have nothing to gain by providing that statement. They have two stocks in their possession, they are familiar with SlideFire and they are remaining mute on the subject, which in turn, means they have no opinion. I challenge someone to find a statement where they have an opinion on the matter, that specifically states that it is illegal.

Right not SlideFire is currently being sold in California in multiple counties, because there is no formal opinion by CADOJ stating it's illegal and by California Penal Code 12020 the SlideFire stock is a Legal stock. CADOJ either needs to have an opinion on the matter or they need to re-write the law banning "All Bump Fire" Shooting Techniques.

Fate
03-17-2012, 2:12 PM
FYI to all The CADOJ has had two SlideFire Stocks in their possession for 9 months. Their opinion is...

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7r2GVXGEvXyot_YIl1P973HU2jWLWy 5CVQvIX7picoEOG2WdP

^^ and thus the reason they've had it for 9 months and not said a peep. They're having too much fun "testing."

paratroop
03-17-2012, 2:30 PM
It's not about "rate of fire" in (23) (b). It's about A manual or power-driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm. And SlideFire is not that.

Gotcha. I dont really think the stock fits the definition of a multi-burst trigger activator. However, I think it would be way easier to convince some average CA joe schmoe jury members it is some dangerous illegal automatic firing device, than it would be to convince them that its a perfectly legal stock.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 2:34 PM
Gotcha. I dont really think the stock fits the definition of a multi-burst trigger activator. However, I think it would be way easier to convince some average CA joe schmoe jury members it is some dangerous illegal automatic firing device, than it would be to convince them that its a perfectly legal stock.

You can use the same scare tactic on "Big, Bad, Scary Assault Rifles that are meant to kill people". It's not the case, but neither is calling the SlideFire an illegal device that turns your gun into an automatic firearm.

jj805
03-17-2012, 2:37 PM
Gotcha. I dont really think the stock fits the definition of a multi-burst trigger activator. However, I think it would be way easier to convince some average CA joe schmoe jury members it is some dangerous illegal automatic firing device, than it would be to convince them that its a perfectly legal stock.

How would that be? There are plenty of videos on youtube of people bump firing without the slide fire stock. I even put a link to one of a guy bump firing a pistol on this thread in my previous post. All you would have to do is show the jury two videos. One with the slide fire stock, and one without. The fact is that the stock dose not change the shooters skill.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 2:38 PM
Good video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX_X3joSD1Q&feature=g-all-u&context=G24f140bFAAAAAAAAAAA

killemall419
03-17-2012, 2:57 PM
Good read:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=527201

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 3:12 PM
Good read:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=527201

It's the same thing we are talking about here and I wouldn't change what I have stated above. People are getting confused on the definitions of Burst Mode vs. Bump Fire. And people think that by flipping a switch you get to shoot automatic fire. Bump Fire is a "Shooting Technique" on any gun and it's not easy, with the SlideFire installed. I've tried it. There are multiple Bump Fire "Techniques" for multiple firearms. This is simply a "Technique" you can use when you have a SlideFire stock on your AR.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 3:14 PM
If you were to Ban SlideFire for allowing you to Bump Fire, you would have to outlaw "Bump Firing" on any gun and how do you outlaw a Shooting Technique?

killemall419
03-17-2012, 3:23 PM
Yeah, except the people that were here on this site from the beginning, and who have known about slidefire from the day they came out, have been adamant in the fact that they are not good to go, no matter how many times it's referred to as a "shooting technique". It doesn't matter what you call it, by definition it is illegal. Once again, the people that have been on this site since its inception and have reviewed gun laws and have consulted with actual Gun Lawyers, have been adamant in the illegality of these stocks. I think I'll take their advice, since they've been fighting this fight far longer than anyone else here. Further, while I agree the act of bump firing is a shooting technique, using a device such as the bumpfire stock to accomplish that "technique" is essentially what makes it a "activator". Then again, my advice is worth what you pay for it, lol.

paratroop
03-17-2012, 3:34 PM
jj805 and pacman79, I DO NOT personally think this device meets any definition of anything illegal. However, I will not be the one to be a test case in a CA court. You guys are more than welcome to do that.Until there is actually a court case swaying one way or the other, I think it is still up for debate. I will even have a trophy made up for the first person to prove in court that this product is legal to own and use in california.

LBDamned
03-17-2012, 3:43 PM
Good video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX_X3joSD1Q&feature=g-all-u&context=G24f140bFAAAAAAAAAAA

he states his credentials in the beginning of the vid - none of which mentions legal background... he includes two pages from wikipedia - to my knowledge, wiki is not a reference that would hold up in a court of law (possibly references within wiki, but wikipedia itself is not a source I'd use for legal purposes).

IMHO, the vid doesnt do anything to indisputably indicate legality (not to the extent that it would be worth introducing in a court of law).

This is not unlike the Tannerite legality debate... it will never be 100% determined until someone is challenged by using it.

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 3:44 PM
jj805 and pacman79, I DO NOT personally think this device meets any definition of anything illegal. However, I will not be the one to be a test case in a CA court. You guys are more than welcome to do that.Until there is actually a court case swaying one way or the other, I think it is still up for debate. I will even have a trophy made up for the first person to prove in court that this product is legal to own and use in california.

I really appreciate that. Thank you. It comes down to education. There are a lot of assumptions about how the SlideFire works. People think that you flip a switch and you start shoot fully automatic. Once you shoot it your realize that it's a technique that takes time to develop, like anything else. Due to peoples lack of knowledge of the stock and how it works, they are mistakenly grouping it into a category that it's not. Since Calguns is suppose to be a bunch of Gun Experts, I would think that they would want to really know how SlideFire works and what it does, so it doesn't get mistakenly grouped into a category in which it's not. That way we can all own one and enjoy shooting our AR's that much more. We buy AR's not to hunt (few do), not to Defend our territory (sounds good, but generally not the case), but because it's fun to shoot. When you add the SlideFire stock, it makes it that much more fun to shoot, legally. Come on Calguns, lets get behind this and educate people how legal it is so we can all own one and further enjoy shooting our AR's!

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 3:47 PM
he states his credentials in the beginning of the vid - none of which mentions legal background... he includes two pages from wikipedia - to my knowledge, wiki is not a reference that would hold up in a court of law (possibly references within wiki, but wikipedia itself is not a source I'd use for legal purposes).

IMHO, the vid doesnt do anything to indisputably indicate legality (not to the extent that it would be worth introducing in a court of law).

This is not unlike the Tannerite legality debate... it will never be 100% determined until someone is challenged by using it.

You are correct "Wikipedia" itself would not hold up, but their references would on both Bump Fire and Burst Mode. Oh, and I also believe Ron Paul is correct. :)

killemall419
03-17-2012, 3:56 PM
See, I think the confusion is that you are assuming that the people that actually have been part of this site for multiple years have never handled one and/or shot a slidefire stock, when in reality, not only have they shot them, out of state with full capacity mags no less, they were determined to be illegal before you were even aware of there existence. It's not getting mistakenly grouped into a category it should not be in. What is happening is you are trying to take it out of the category it has already determined to be part of. No matter how many times you repeat it, the people that are veterans on calguns have already had this conversation so many times that they made a sticky at the top of the page (telling you they are illegal) so this exact topic doesn't resurface weekly. No matter how you cut it, the people that actually talk with California gun attorneys have deemed it illegal. Since they are in the businees of determining what is legal and what is not, they have in fact determined this to be ILLEGAL. So legally, there is no technical ruling, however, the people that have gone to school for the years needed to be certified to determin legality, have determined it is a multi burst activator, and therefore illegal. And yes, I'm pretty sure the problem is that Calguns is a community of Gun Experts, they do know how slidefire works, and they know they are illegal. Also, I'm pretty sure there are no references in the Wiki that have anything to do with legality in California. As a matter of fact, the only reference material on the slidefire wiki is a link to: "Joseph von Benedikt (22 July 2011). "Shoot Your AR-15 Faster Than Ever With a Slide Fire Stock". Shooting times." Which would hurt the reasoning of having them in California more than anything, since they are even referencing shooting your AR-15 Faster Than Ever Before, in other words, increase your rate of fire.

repubconserv
03-17-2012, 3:59 PM
Pac man, make no mistakes. the people on here know how it works. They (at least the lawyers) have immersed themselves in California law, when the slidefire came out, they researched it, and came to the conclusion that it was illegal.

you on the other hand, we have no idea of about your legal credentials, you offer no other explanation than "it is not a switch" and "it requires technique" for its legality, and you want people to jump into this murky quarry head first after you.

You give no actual response to the law where is says "(A) A device designed or redesigned to be attached to a semiautomatic firearm which allows the firearm to discharge two or more shots in a burst by activating the device.

which, when you "activate" the device (using "the technique" ) you get what sounds a whole lot like a burst of 2 or more rounds being fired.

this conversation has been going on at least as long as I have been on here. not once have I seen one of the experts say it is okay to have.

As people have said before, you can go ahead and try it if you want to, but do not expect CGF to go to bat for you if and when you get arrested

killemall419
03-17-2012, 4:03 PM
igQlbesF0zA

LBDamned
03-17-2012, 4:14 PM
igQlbesF0zA

that's pretty damn funny!!! :smilielol5:

I do wish he was a better speaker... a large percentage of US citizens (I purposely dont us use the word "Americans"), aren't cerebral enough to get his message - many need someone with swagger before they will listen.

If we could put Ron Paul's ideas in Santorum's body with Gingrich's speaking ability, we'd have the winner!

pacman1979
03-17-2012, 4:16 PM
Pac man, make no mistakes. the people on here know how it works. They (at least the lawyers) have immersed themselves in California law, when the slidefire came out, they researched it, and came to the conclusion that it was illegal.

you on the other hand, we have no idea of about your legal credentials, you offer no other explanation than "it is not a switch" and "it requires technique" for its legality, and you want people to jump into this murky quarry head first after you.

You give no actual response to the law where is says "

which, when you "activate" the device (using "the technique" ) you get what sounds a whole lot like a burst of 2 or more rounds being fired.

this conversation has been going on at least as long as I have been on here. not once have I seen one of the experts say it is okay to have.

As people have said before, you can go ahead and try it if you want to, but do not expect CGF to go to bat for you if and when you get arrested

You are correct when you said "sounds a whole lot like a burst of 2 or more rounds being fired." Firecrackers sounds like that too, but that is not what is actually taking place. It's not a "burst." That is what people are getting confused about. And your calling "the technique" the activator. So ban the technique not the stock and if you ban the technique you would have to ban all techniques. How do you do that? It's about educating. Bump Fire is cool with everyone, but not is you have a SlideFire stock. Doesn't make sense to me.

jj805
03-17-2012, 4:18 PM
jj805 and pacman79, I DO NOT personally think this device meets any definition of anything illegal. However, I will not be the one to be a test case in a CA court. You guys are more than welcome to do that.Until there is actually a court case swaying one way or the other, I think it is still up for debate. I will even have a trophy made up for the first person to prove in court that this product is legal to own and use in california.

I agree with not wanting to be the test case. But I am bringing up points of an argument to promote discusion on a topic that I personally would like to have and think falls into an area where it is assumed it is illegal because of a PC that is worded in a way that makes no sense. The facts of what the slide fire stock actually dose and dose not do, IMO don't fall into the specifics of the PC in question. I am simply arguing that point. If it were a cut and dry yes or no, I wouldn't be posting.

Mr. Casull
03-17-2012, 4:23 PM
And so all of the experts in the known world said the world was flat. Columbus didn't believe them and off he went. Guess what, the world wasn't flat! I agree with those who say if DOJ has the stock and they haven't ruled on it, it is because it is legal. If they could prove it was illegal they would have already done it. By keeping silent they are giving the impression that it is illegal. Good for those people who step up and buy it and use it!

LBDamned
03-17-2012, 4:27 PM
And so all of the experts in the known world said the world was flat. Columbus didn't believe them and off he went. Guess what, the world wasn't flat! I agree with those who say if DOJ has the stock and they haven't ruled on it, it is because it is legal. If they could prove it was illegal they would have already done it. By keeping silent they are giving the impression that it is illegal. Good for those people who step up and buy it and use it!

maybe it's a trap ;)

repubconserv
03-17-2012, 4:53 PM
Pacman, you can say that it is not a trigger activator all you want, but I will not take your opinion serioulsy until you can give reasonable evidence that modifying your semiauto rifle to assist you in bumpfiring is legal.

Bumpfiring is fine (legally) because you do not modify your rifle to help you, and people generally wear pants while shooting.so for the prosecution to argue that pants you were wearing were a trigger activator... that is going to be a b**** to prove. If your modify your gun on the other hand, they can prove that is is specifically to aid in bumpfiring (multi burst trigger activation)

And so all of the experts in the known world said the world was flat this is true, but columbus had evidence to back up his claim that the earth was round.. Columbus didn't believe them and off he went. Guess what, the world wasn't flat!yeah, but columbus had reasonable certainty that the earth was not flat, he had evidence, he had logic. he did not blindly set out in his quest. I agree with those who say if DOJ has the stock and they haven't ruled on it, it is because it is legal. If they could prove it was illegal they would have already done it. By keeping silent they are giving the impression that it is illegal. Good for those people who step up and buy it and use it!

Just because no one had ruled on gravity before newton, didn't mean people went and jumped off of cliffs because no one had given an official ruling on gravity.

to put this whole situation in perspective: In corner one you have CA state. they do not care if you lose your gun rights, in fact they kinda want that.

in the other corner you have CalGuns, which does care about your rights and are quite knowledgeable in the law. they have reviewed the situation and said do not try it.

finally, you have people with limited experience in legal matters (if you count Law and Order "legal experience" ) and have a giant hardon for the bumpfire stock, purporting that because CA has not said anything, it is legal, expert opinions be damned...

I know I am absolutely crazy, but I'm gonna stick with expert opinion.

Librarian
03-17-2012, 4:57 PM
We do have a sticky about this, right here in this forum.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=527201

These are 100% illegal in CA.

If you are uncomfortable with just me saying this, know that gun lawyer Jason Davis says the same thing.

We have sought out and received competent legal advice on the topic.

Some folks disagree.

They're free to do that, but I would strongly suggest a potential seller or buyer get individual legal counsel, and then act in his/her perceived best interests.

Get back to us when you have an opinion from your own lawyer(s).

Closed.